Re: grep --no-index and pathspec

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 2011/2/12 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> The function fill_directory() already takes a pathspec, albeit in the
>> degenerate "const char **" form. Why does its output need further
>> filtering?
>
> Because it was designed so? Quotes from 9fc42d6 (Optimize directory
> listing with pathspec limiter. - 2007-03-30), which added
> simplify_away(), the function that does pathspec filtering for
> fill_directory():
>
>     NOTE! This does *not* obviate the need for the caller to do the *exact*
>     pathspec match later. It's a first-level filter on "read_directory()", but
>     it does not do the full pathspec thing. Maybe it should. But in the
>     meantime,...

I was around back then, so I know how the code came about ;-)

The pieces used in the pathspec limiting logic have been restructured well
enough that I suspect it may now be feasible for us to revisit the "Maybe
it should" part in the above quote.  Thanks to nd/struct-pathspec topic, I
think we are already half-way there.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]