From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] revision: simplify argument parsing. Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 21:22:12 -0700 Message-ID: <7vpsjzguff.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vr74jxhp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vr74jw0zj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vmzf4mzsv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <443063E2.1040904@lsrfire.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linus Torvalds , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Apr 03 06:22:26 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FQGa2-0007uW-QJ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 03 Apr 2006 06:22:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751293AbWDCEWQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:22:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751320AbWDCEWQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:22:16 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:22458 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751293AbWDCEWP (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:22:15 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060403042214.LRQS17437.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Mon, 3 Apr 2006 00:22:14 -0400 To: Rene Scharfe User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Rene Scharfe writes: > The comment is misleading because the patch not only moves stuff around, > it also removes setting of revs->limited when revs->min_age has been > set. You are correct that the patch does more than it claims to. That is an independent fix mentioned in my earlier message <7vr74jxhp3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>. We did not have to pay the overhead of having to call limit_list() when only min_age was specified because we did not do traversal filtering using UNINTERESTING logic for min_age, but we called it anyway. Unlike --max-age that marks an old one _and_ its parents uninteresting, it needs to filter a young one without making its parents uninteresting.