From: Elijah Newren Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 23:50:39 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] Fix ignoring of pathspecs with rev-list --objects Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Elijah Newren wrote: >> @@ -84,7 +85,24 @@ static void process_tree(struct rev_info *revs, >> >>        init_tree_desc(&desc, tree->buffer, tree->size); >> >> -       while (tree_entry(&desc, &entry)) { >> +       for (; desc.size; update_tree_entry(&desc)) { >> +               entry = desc.entry; >> + >> +               if (!all_interesting) { >> +                       char *full_path = path_name(path, name); >> +                       int full_path_len = strlen(full_path); >> +                       int showit = tree_entry_interesting(&desc, >> full_path, full_path_len, >> +                                                           &revs->diffopt); >> +                       free(full_path); > > I wonder if we can avoid xmalloc/free so many times here. If full_path > is unchanged, how about moving it outside the loop? Good point. >> diff --git a/tree-diff.c b/tree-diff.c >> index cd659c6..2fb670b 100644 >> --- a/tree-diff.c >> +++ b/tree-diff.c >> @@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ static int compare_tree_entry(struct tree_desc *t1, struct >> tree_desc *t2, const >>  *  - zero for no >>  *  - negative for "no, and no subsequent entries will be either" >>  */ >> -static int tree_entry_interesting(struct tree_desc *desc, const char *base, >> int baselen, struct diff_options *opt) >> +int tree_entry_interesting(struct tree_desc *desc, const char *base, int >> baselen, struct diff_options *opt) >>  { >>        const char *path; >>        const unsigned char *sha1; > > While at it, can you please also fix its comments? The comments say > pathspec while what it uses is actually path prefix. Maybe something > like this > > diff --git a/tree-diff.c b/tree-diff.c > index 3c34c77..514dbca 100644 > --- a/tree-diff.c > +++ b/tree-diff.c > @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static int compare_tree_entry(struct tree_desc *t1, > struct tree_desc *t2, const >  } > >  /* > - * Is a tree entry interesting given the pathspec we have? > + * Is a tree entry interesting given the path prefix we have? I believe the comment is parsed thus: "tree entry" == combination of desc, base, and baselen. "pathspec" == paths and pathlens fields of opt (which do provide a pathspec). So I believe the original was correct, though I can see how it's confusing at first. >  * >  * Return: >  *  - 2 for "yes, and all subsequent entries will be" > > > This patch is good stuff. Please be informed I will steal this patch > for my narrow use. Thanks, but I just found a bug with it; I'm investigating.