From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:03:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] modify/delete conflict resolution overwrites untracked file
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0812151201300.30933@intel-tinevez-2-302>
In-Reply-To: <7vljuhwwtg.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> >> merge-recursive: do not clobber untracked working tree garbage
> >> ...
> >> +static int would_lose_untracked(const char *path)
> >> +{
> >> +	int pos = cache_name_pos(path, strlen(path));
> >> +
> >> +	if (pos < 0)
> >> +		pos = -1 - pos;
> >> +	while (pos < active_nr &&
> >> +	       !strcmp(path, active_cache[pos]->name)) {
> >> +		/*
> >> +		 * If stage #0, it is definitely tracked.
> >> +		 * If it has stage #2 then it was tracked
> >> +		 * before this merge started.  All other
> >> +		 * cases the path was not tracked.
> >> +		 */
> >> +		switch (ce_stage(active_cache[pos])) {
> >> +		case 0:
> >> +		case 2:
> >> +			return 0;
> >> +		}
> >> +		pos++;
> >> +	}
> >> +	return file_exists(path);
> >
> > I wonder if it is cheaper to test file_exists() when the index contains a 
> > lot of files...
> 
> "cheaper" than what?

Oops.  I meant "cheaper to test file_exists() _first_".  But thinking 
about it again, it is probably way more expensive, especially in the cold 
cache case.

Sorry for the noise,
Dscho