Re: Weird behavior of 'git log --before' or 'git log --date-order': Commits from 2011 are treated to be before 1980

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> There may be also cases where the two diverge. Obviously having two
> parsers isn't ideal. I think sharing the code may involve a lot of work,
> though. The pretty-print parser is interested in pulling out more
> information, and is less focused on performance. Parsing commits is
> traditionally a hot path, as we historically had to parse every commit,
> even if we weren't showing it (including non-log operations like
> computing merge bases, reachability, and so forth).
>
> But that may not matter so much. One, we already inflate the whole
> commit object, not just the header. So even if we spend a few extra
> instructions on parsing, it may not be noticeable. And two, these days
> we often cache commit metadata in the commit-graph files, which avoids
> loading the commit message entirely (and thus this parsing) for most
> operations.

Makes readers wonder which parser is used to parse commit objects in
order to populate the commit-graph files.  If that step screws up,
we'd record a broken timestamp there X-<.