On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 11:12:37AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Obviously a solution that always provides an exact right answer is > > preferable to "pretty good results", but we'd have to keep in mind the > > performance difference. > > And that is why the current --follow hack was declared to be good enough > to give "pretty good results" by its inventor, no? Absolutely. I just think we can make "pretty good" slightly better with just a little more effort. > I still agree with it personally, and if we _were_ to improve it out of > "hack" status, we should aim to do the right thing (provided if there is a > "right thing" exists). Right. The problem is that I'm not sure we want to pay the performance penalty to take it out of "hack" status. But that doesn't mean we can't make it as good a hack as possible. :) Actually, I think the non-hack version of it is not really --follow at all, but more like Bo's line-level browser. But I think that still leaves room for a solution like --follow that is perhaps a bit faster and provides a pretty good answer. -Peff -- 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