Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] grep: fix grepping for "intent to add" files

> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> So I wonder if a better change would be more like
>>>
>>>         for (...) {
>>>                 if (!S_ISREG(ce->ce_mode))
>>>                         continue; /* not a regular file */
>>>                 if (!ce_path_match(ce, pathspec, NULL)
>>>                         continue; /* uninteresting */
>>> +               if (cached && ce_intent_to_add(ce))
>>> +                       continue; /* path not yet in the index */
>>>
>>>                 if (cached || ...)
>>>                         UNCHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL
>>>
>>> perhaps?
>>
>> I did wonder a bit about these cases. But, can i-t-a really be
>> combined with CE_VALID or CE_SKIP_WORKTREE? CE_SKIP_... is
>> automatically set and should not cover i-t-a entries imo (I didn't
>> check the implementation). CE_VALID is about real entries, yes you
>> could do "git update-index --assume-unchanged <ita-path>" but it does
>> not feel right to me.
>
> Yeah but we know people are stupid^W^Wdo unexpected things ;-)
>
>> If cached is false and ce_ita() is true and either CE_VALID or
>> CE_SKIP_WORKTREE is set, we would continue to grep an _empty_ SHA-1.
>> But I think we should grep_file() instead, at least for CE_VALID.
>
> Yes, that is the breakage I noticed in the patch under discussion
> and that I wanted to fix in the "I wonder if a better change would
> be..." version.