On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:36:06PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > > I like that, too. It's a little more costly just because it may involve > > object-db writes, but I think in most cases it would be fine. I almost > > always "git stash" away discarded changes these days instead of "git > > reset --hard", because it effectively provides this kind of log. > > Obviously we do eventually turn the index into a tree, which is used > by the commit. Would it be possible to simply somehow store these > trees, and have commands which blow the tree away simply instead, save > it? I'm not sure how costly that is. For an up-to-date index with the cache-tree extension, this should be pretty cheap. Even for a partially-staged index, where we already have the blob in the object database, it should just incur the tree computation (and parts you didn't touch would hopefully have an up-to-date cache-tree). Where it gets expensive is when you are throwing away working-tree changes, and you have to re-hash those objects. Conceptually that's not much worse than just calling `git add`, but there are corner cases (e.g., imagine you keep a 1GB clone of another project in an ignored directory, and then `git clean -dx` wants to `git add` all of it). -Peff
