Re: [PATCH] ls-files: fix overeager pathspec optimization
- From
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- Date
- Jan 9, 2010, 01:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001081701570.7821@localhost.localdomain>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v8wc8kshh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Yes, and the previous patch wasn't adding what is ignored to the array, so > here is a re-roll to fix that in addition to the fix to "should the loop > start from checking an empty path?" issue you noticed.
Ack. Looks ok to me, and I think it's a lot more obvious.
Show 6 quoted lines
> But I am starting to wonder if we might be better off restructuring > read_directory_recursive(). Currently it assumes that the path it was > given _must_ be of interest (i.e. not ignored) and runs excluded() on > subdirectories it finds to make that same decision before recursing into > them or skipping them. It might make more sense if it first checked if > the path given by the caller should be ignored and act accordingly.
Hmm. I can't make myself care one way or the other, I have to admit. I assume you mean basically taking the path and using the first component of it _instead_ of doing a readdir() - and getting rid of the simplification up front?
I agree that that should work. Would it be simpler and cleaner? Perhaps. I'd have to see both patches to be able to tell. I do admit that while I acked your patch, it sure ain't _pretty_ to do that special odd "has_leading_ignored_dir()" thing.
Linus