On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:02 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In the RFC series I sent this was first implemented in terms of the > --format option, and I skipped the custom implementation you're adding > here: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/RFC-patch-7.7-5e34df4f8dd-20211217T131635Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/ > > I think in terms of patch series structure it would make sense to do > that, and then have this custom --object-only implementation in terms of > not-"--format " follow from that, and thus with the tests for the two Sorry, the "not-"--format" means? > (we'd add the tests you're adding here first, just for a > --format="%(objectname)" or whatever) we'd see that the two are 1=1 > equivalent in terms of functionality, but that this one is <X>% more > optimized. Please allow me to understand your advice, if we put the commit of introducing "--format" before the commit of introducing "--object-only", will be better because it's possible to supply more optimized performance (if we have) information in the commit message.
