Re: [PATCH v2] ls-files: filter pathspec before lstat

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

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

>> Yeah, absolutely it's arbitrary. The simplest answer is that others
>> are welcome to bump this, provided they make the case for it.
>
> OK. I can live with, I suppose, but I am tempted to say that it should
> just kick in always (i.e., removing the pathspec.nr check).

Yeah, that is certainly simpler, and this ...

> Though I did show a case where the performance regresses, it was pretty
> made-up and not something I'd expect in the real world. And you'd see
> that same crappy performance with "git ls-files -- $(git ls-files)",
> without the "-m".

... makes it clear that "trigger only when there is one element in
the pathspec" is optimizing for a wrong case.

I think we want the log message document that this kind of thinking
went into the final choice of the heuristics, like, "trigger only
when there is one because ...", or "even though it would actually be
an anti-optimization when the pathspec has enourmous number of
elements, we always use this optimization because ...", but as long
as that is done, either solution is fine.

Thanks.