Re: [PATCH] tree_entry_interesting: make recursive mode default

[Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>]

2012/1/12 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Thanks, but I am curious about two (and a half) things.
>
>  - The "max_depth" option has perfectly good and natural "invalid"
>   sentinel values (i.e. 0 or negative). Why do we need a separate
>   bitfield?

We want infinite recursion by default, by max_depth default value is
0, which is non-recursive.

>  - Special casing the non-recursive mode of diff-tree is perfectly
>   acceptable, but nonrecursive_diff_tree does not sound like a very good
>   name for it for two reasons. Perhaps there may be other users that want
>   the "surface only" behaviour, so having "diff_tree" in the name limits
>   its future (re)use. Also an option that is named negatively inevitably
>   invites "if (!opt->non_whatever)" double negative. Can we come up with
>   a better name, perhaps "onelevel_only" or something?

I'm bad at naming, any other names are welcome. onelevel_only sounds good.

>  - Shouldn't "onelevel_only" be the same as limiting to a single depth
>   with "max_depth"?

I thought of that but not sure it's equivalent to max_depth == 1 or
max_depth == 0, so I separated it for safety and clarity. max_depth
feature is driven by git-grep and there were a few interpretations how
it should behave last time, so I'm not sure if its behavior may change
in future.
-- 
Duy