# [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs 5 messages from 2007-12-09 to 2007-12-09. Participants: Jeff King, Junio C Hamano, Jonathan del Strother. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/11207 ## Jeff King, 2007-12-09 08:21 Subject: [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs Message-ID: <20071209082133.GA2257@coredump.intra.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20071209082133.GA2257%40coredump.intra.peff.net ``` The tip about speeding up subsequent operations is now obsolete; since aecbf914, git-diff now squelches empty diffs and performs an automatic refresh. Signed-off-by: Jeff King --- This is on top of my other patches to the git-status docs. I don't see any reason to mention this side effect at all. Those who know enough to set diff.autorefreshindex presumably know what they are doing, and the removed paragraph is a bit confusing to those who don't. If there is some desire to document the side effect, I think we should at least remove the mention of speeding up git-diff (which is just wrong now). Documentation/git-status.txt | 7 ------- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-status.txt b/Documentation/git-status.txt index a1bb9bd..5c5a480 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-status.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-status.txt @@ -28,13 +28,6 @@ If there is no path that is different between the index file and the current HEAD commit (i.e., there is nothing to commit by running `git-commit`), the command exits with non-zero status. -If any paths have been touched in the working tree (that is, -their modification times have changed) but their contents and -permissions are identical to those in the index file, the command -updates the index file. Running `git-status` can thus speed up -subsequent operations such as `git-diff` if the working tree -contains many paths that have been touched but not modified. - OUTPUT ------ -- 1.5.3.7.2187.gb646 ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2007-12-09 08:33 Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs Message-ID: <7vhciss1ww.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vhciss1ww.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: <20071209082133.GA2257@coredump.intra.peff.net> ``` Jeff King writes: > If there is some desire to document the side effect, I think we should > at least remove the mention of speeding up git-diff (which is just wrong > now). Why is it "just wrong"? Having to squelch the false hits and to run auto-refresh are both unnecessary overhead if your index is fresh. ``` ## Jeff King, 2007-12-09 08:42 Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs Message-ID: <20071209084217.GA2377@coredump.intra.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20071209084217.GA2377%40coredump.intra.peff.net In-Reply-To: <7vhciss1ww.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> ``` On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 12:33:19AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > If there is some desire to document the side effect, I think we should > > at least remove the mention of speeding up git-diff (which is just wrong > > now). > > Why is it "just wrong"? Having to squelch the false hits and to run > auto-refresh are both unnecessary overhead if your index is fresh. I mean that this is not a useful technique for speeding up git-diff anymore (assuming you have not tinkered with autorefreshindex, in which case I assume you know what you are doing and don't need this tip). Did you think I meant "there is no speedup with autorefreshindex off", or are you arguing that even with the new diff behavior there is still a speedup in "git status; git diff" over just "git status"? -Peff ``` ## Jonathan del Strother, 2007-12-09 16:16 Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs Message-ID: <57518fd10712090816pa43cf97mbc1b8f5fbe81c66f@mail.gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/57518fd10712090816pa43cf97mbc1b8f5fbe81c66f%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20071209082133.GA2257@coredump.intra.peff.net> ``` On Dec 9, 2007 8:21 AM, Jeff King wrote: > The tip about speeding up subsequent operations is now > obsolete; since aecbf914, git-diff now squelches empty diffs > and performs an automatic refresh. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King > --- > This is on top of my other patches to the git-status docs. > > I don't see any reason to mention this side effect at all. Those who > know enough to set diff.autorefreshindex presumably know what they are > doing, and the removed paragraph is a bit confusing to those who don't. > ... I wasn't aware the index needed refreshing. This might be totally unrelated to the present conversation, but the GIT-VERSION-GEN script occasionally gives me spurious 'dirty' results (eg when a file timestamp changes despite the content having changed). Should it perhaps be running "git update-index --refresh" before it runs "git diff-index --name-only HEAD" ? ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2007-12-09 18:15 Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't mention index refreshing side effect in git-status docs Message-ID: <7vhcirpwdk.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vhcirpwdk.fsf%40gitster.siamese.dyndns.org In-Reply-To: <57518fd10712090816pa43cf97mbc1b8f5fbe81c66f@mail.gmail.com> ``` "Jonathan del Strother" writes: > ... the GIT-VERSION-GEN > script occasionally gives me spurious 'dirty' results (eg when a file > timestamp changes despite the content having changed). Good eyes. Either refreshing before diff-index or using the "git diff" Porcelain would be more appropriate. ```