Hi, On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > >> I fully agree that git should be optimized for the common case. But > >> even for the common case, I also find the feature strange. You didn't > >> answer that part of my message, but I still fail to see a rationale > >> for making "git-diff; git-status" different from "git-status; git-diff". > > > > For performance reasons, git always compares the files' stat information > > with that stored in the index. > > I know that, but how does it answer the part of my message that you > are citing? You _acknowledge_ that git is optimized for performance! And therefore you should also acknowledge that you _throw that away_ if you let your index go out of sync. > > So when you do "git diff" and it tells you all those diff lines, while no > > file was really changed, it tells you "get your act together! You just > > _willfully_ slowed down git's performance". > > The question remains: why should someone running git-diff get this, > and someone running git-status not get this? Because git-status is an index-updating operation. That's why. Ciao, Dscho - 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
