Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> +static int grep_cache(struct grep_opt *opt, const struct pathspec *pathspec,
> + int cached)
> {
> int hit = 0;
> int nr;
> + struct strbuf name = STRBUF_INIT;
> + int name_base_len = 0;
> + if (super_prefix) {
> + name_base_len = strlen(super_prefix);
> + strbuf_addstr(&name, super_prefix);
> + }
> +
> read_cache();
>
> for (nr = 0; nr < active_nr; nr++) {
> const struct cache_entry *ce = active_cache[nr];
> - if (!S_ISREG(ce->ce_mode))
> - continue;
> - if (!ce_path_match(ce, pathspec, NULL))
> - continue;
> - /*
> - * If CE_VALID is on, we assume worktree file and its cache entry
> - * are identical, even if worktree file has been modified, so use
> - * cache version instead
> - */
> - if (cached || (ce->ce_flags & CE_VALID) || ce_skip_worktree(ce)) {
> - if (ce_stage(ce) || ce_intent_to_add(ce))
> - continue;
> - hit |= grep_sha1(opt, ce->oid.hash, ce->name, 0,
> - ce->name);
> + strbuf_setlen(&name, name_base_len);
> + strbuf_addstr(&name, ce->name);
> +
> + if (S_ISREG(ce->ce_mode) &&
> + match_pathspec(pathspec, name.buf, name.len, 0, NULL,
> + S_ISDIR(ce->ce_mode) ||
> + S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode))) {
> + /*
> + * If CE_VALID is on, we assume worktree file and its
> + * cache entry are identical, even if worktree file has
> + * been modified, so use cache version instead
> + */
> + if (cached || (ce->ce_flags & CE_VALID) ||
> + ce_skip_worktree(ce)) {
> + if (ce_stage(ce) || ce_intent_to_add(ce))
> + continue;
> + hit |= grep_sha1(opt, ce->oid.hash, ce->name,
> + 0, ce->name);
> + } else {
> + hit |= grep_file(opt, ce->name);
> + }
> + } else if (recurse_submodules && S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode) &&
> + submodule_path_match(pathspec, name.buf, NULL)) {
> + hit |= grep_submodule(opt, NULL, ce->name, ce->name);
> }
> - else
> - hit |= grep_file(opt, ce->name);
We used to reject anything other than S_ISREG() upfront in the loop,
and then either did grep_sha1() from the cache or from grep_file()
from the working tree.
Now, the guard upfront is removed, and we do the same in the first
part of this if/elseif. The elseif part deals with a submodule that
could match the pathspec.
Don't we need a final else clause that would skip the remainder of
this loop? What would happen to a S_ISREG() path that does *NOT*
match the given pathspec? We used to just "continue", but it seems
to me that such a path will fall through the above if/elseif in the
new code. Would that be a problem?