Re: grep --no-index and pathspec

From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 12, 2011, 08:39 UTC
Message-ID: <AANLkTikZuRyyZ4tErYuo1itmEs1X_gT5aogpTM3s4gON@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vvd0py7xy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>     NOTE! This does *not* obviate the need for the caller to do the *exact*
>>     pathspec match later. It's a first-level filter on "read_directory()", but
>>     it does not do the full pathspec thing. Maybe it should. But in the
>>     meantime,...
>
> I was around back then, so I know how the code came about ;-)
>
> The pieces used in the pathspec limiting logic have been restructured well
> enough that I suspect it may now be feasible for us to revisit the "Maybe
> it should" part in the above quote.  Thanks to nd/struct-pathspec topic, I
> think we are already half-way there.

I was around too, just oblivious about things. I can look into that. Need to think a bit how to save what pathspecs are "seen", so that prune_directory() in builtin/add.c can be dropped.

-- 
Duy