Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] backfill: add --sparse option

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 04:29:52PM +0000, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
> diff --git a/path-walk.c b/path-walk.c
> index 136ec08fb0e..c7456a9c1c0 100644
> --- a/path-walk.c
> +++ b/path-walk.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>  #include "object.h"
>  #include "oid-array.h"
>  #include "prio-queue.h"
> +#include "repository.h"
>  #include "revision.h"
>  #include "string-list.h"
>  #include "strmap.h"
> @@ -173,6 +174,23 @@ static int add_tree_entries(struct path_walk_context *ctx,
>  		if (type == OBJ_TREE)
>  			strbuf_addch(&path, '/');
>  
> +		if (ctx->info->pl) {
> +			int dtype;
> +			enum pattern_match_result match;
> +			match = path_matches_pattern_list(path.buf, path.len,
> +							  path.buf + base_len, &dtype,
> +							  ctx->info->pl,
> +							  ctx->repo->index);
> +
> +			if (ctx->info->pl->use_cone_patterns &&
> +			    match == NOT_MATCHED)
> +				continue;
> +			else if (!ctx->info->pl->use_cone_patterns &&
> +				 type == OBJ_BLOB &&
> +				 match != MATCHED)

For my own understanding: is there as pecific reason why one of the
branches uses `== NOT_MATCHED` whereas the other one uses `!= MATCHED`?

> diff --git a/t/helper/test-path-walk.c b/t/helper/test-path-walk.c
> index 7f2d409c5bc..61e845e5ec2 100644
> --- a/t/helper/test-path-walk.c
> +++ b/t/helper/test-path-walk.c
> @@ -65,7 +67,7 @@ static int emit_block(const char *path, struct oid_array *oids,
>  
>  int cmd__path_walk(int argc, const char **argv)
>  {
> -	int res;
> +	int res, stdin_pl = 0;
>  	struct rev_info revs = REV_INFO_INIT;
>  	struct path_walk_info info = PATH_WALK_INFO_INIT;
>  	struct path_walk_test_data data = { 0 };
> @@ -80,6 +82,8 @@ int cmd__path_walk(int argc, const char **argv)
>  			 N_("toggle inclusion of tree objects")),
>  		OPT_BOOL(0, "prune", &info.prune_all_uninteresting,
>  			 N_("toggle pruning of uninteresting paths")),
> +		OPT_BOOL(0, "stdin-pl", &stdin_pl,
> +			 N_("read a pattern list over stdin")),
>  		OPT_END(),
>  	};
>  

I was about to suggest giving this a more descriptive name, as it might
be confusing for anybody not intimately familiar with the code. But then
I noticed that this is part of the test helper, only, so it doesn't
matter as much. So feel free to ignore.

Patrick