On Sat, 16 Feb 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > I like this idea a lot. I'd actually also like it for commit, although (1)
> > and (3a) obviously don't happen there. It would help to combat my tendency
> > to forget to push when I mean to.
>
> Thanks.
>
> >> +/*
> >> + * We really should allow cb_data... Yuck
> >> + */
> >> +static const char *branch_name;
> >> +static int branch_name_len;
> >> +static char *found_remote;
> >> +static char *found_merge;
> >> +static int read_branch_config(const char *var, const char *value)
> >> +{
> >
> > ...
> >
> > I think you want branch_get(), which handles all the config file stuff up
> > to approximately here:
>
> Fixups are very much welcomed. This was more or less a proof of
> concept.
I'm also in part worried about the lack of publicity "struct branch" has
gotten; it would have saved you having to write 64 of 136 lines, so it's
worth you knowing about.
> >> + if (show_log) {
> >> + const char *args[32];
> >> + int ac;
> >> +
> >> + ac = 0;
> >> + args[ac++] = "log";
> >> + args[ac++] = "--pretty=oneline";
> >> + args[ac++] = "--abbrev-commit";
> >> + args[ac++] = "--left-right";
> >> + args[ac++] = "--boundary";
> >> + args[ac++] = symmetric;
> >> + args[ac++] = "--";
> >> + args[ac] = NULL;
> >> +
> >> + run_command_v_opt(args, RUN_GIT_CMD);
> >
> > We really should be able to do this in-process, although I'm not sure if
> > we really can.
>
> The code runs in_merge_bases() twice, between our branch head
> and the base, but if we really care about the performance, we
> can have a single merge-base traversal and the resulting object
> pool will have everything necessary to emit the log output
> without a separate traversal.
>
> Because I think that is reasonably easy, I just did not bother
> to. This is not a performance critical piece of code anyway.
>
> One thing I thought about was to limit the output to latest N
> entries from both sides. That would also be easier to implement
> if we do a single merge-base traversal and reuse the result.
Yeah, the real advantage to doing it in-process is being able to give a
particularly useful overview. Also, I think spawning a pager for it is
distracting.
I've also got a change to make it do this report for "git checkout" and
"git checkout HEAD" so you can find out if the current branch needs
anything, but I want to look at it again while not so sleepy before
sending it, and also write some tests.
-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-
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
