From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: breakage in revision traversal with pathspec
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:35:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130920033541.GC15101@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq38p0sdeb.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 02:35:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> -- >8 --
> Subject: revision: do not peel tags used in range notation
>
> A range notation "A..B" means exactly the same thing as what "^A B"
> means, i.e. the set of commits that are reachable from B but not
> from A. But the internal representation after the revision parser
> parsed these two notations are subtly different.
> [...]
Thanks for a very clear explanation. This definitely seems like an
improvement, and the patch looks good to me.
One question, though. With your patch, if I do "tag1..tag2", I get both
the tags and the peeled commits in the pending object list. Whereas with
"^tag1 tag2", we put only the tags into the list, and we expect the
traversal machinery to peel them later. I cannot off-hand think of a
reason this difference should be a problem, but I am wondering if there
is some code path that does not traverse, but just looks at pending
objects, that might care.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-20 3:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-10 17:19 breakage in revision traversal with pathspec Junio C Hamano
2013-09-10 21:27 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-09-10 22:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-11 17:49 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-09-11 18:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-09-11 19:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-11 19:39 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-09-11 21:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-19 21:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-20 3:35 ` Jeff King [this message]
2013-09-20 4:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-20 5:11 ` Jeff King
2013-09-20 17:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-25 9:12 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130920033541.GC15101@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=kevin@bracey.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).