Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>> + if (opt->reflog_info) {
>> + strbuf_addstr(&buf, "reflog ");
>> + get_reflog_message(&buf, opt->reflog_info);
>> + strbuf_addch(&buf, '\n');
>> + strbuf_addstr(&buf, commit->buffer);
>> + }
>> + if (buf.len)
>> + retval = grep_buffer(&opt->grep_filter, buf.buf, buf.len);
>> + else
>> + retval = grep_buffer(&opt->grep_filter,
>> + commit->buffer, strlen(commit->buffer));
>> + strbuf_release(&buf);
>> + return retval;
>
> I like how callers not doing a reflog walk do not have to pay the price
> to do the extra allocating. We could further limit it to only when
> --grep-reflog is in effect, but I guess that would mean wading through
> grep_filter's patterns, since it could be buried amidst ANDs and ORs?
>
> One alternative would be to set a bit in the grep_opt when we call
> append_header_grep_pattern. It feels a bit like a layering violation,
> though. I guess the bit could also go into rev_info. It may not even be
> a measurable slowdown, though. Premature optimization and all that.
I do not think it is a layering violation. compile_grep_exp()
should be aware of the short-cut possibilities and your "our
expression is interested in reflog so we need to read it" is very
similar in spirit to the existing opt->extended bit.
It will obviously allow us to avoid reading reflog information
unnecessarily here. I think it makes perfect sense.
We may also want to flag the use of the --grep-reflog option when
the --walk-reflogs option is not in effect in setup_revisions() as
an error, or something.
--
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