On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 09:32:07AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Yes, I meant it literally. And, no, Git could not possibly know so it > > would have to be optional behaviour. But it's probably a lot of work > > for (for most people) little gain. > > Not only little gain, but also important risk: users of this feature > would be likely to spend hours debugging something just because some > files weren't recompiled at the right time. > > If you want to optimize the number of files compiled by "make", then > ccache is your friend. This one is safe. Yes. Despite my previous message showing what _could_ be done, I do think it's crazy. You should just use ccache. Speaking of which; does anybody know of a git-aware ccache-like tool? We already have a nice index of the sha1 of each file in the repository (along with a stat cache showing us whether it's up-to-date or not). Something like ccache could avoid even looking in the C files at all if it relied on git's index. I don't know how much speedup it would yield in practice, though. -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