git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com>,
	Ben Peart <Ben.Peart@microsoft.com>,
	Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] checkout: optionally speed up "git checkout -b foo"
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 14:59:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPig+cRtUeSCUnUFw0xgXEV7nyBiORZSLfLYfhKWjXxcgHvQmg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqeffqrqb3.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:04 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com> writes:
> > I'm not thrilled with the long list either (the plethora of comments
> > probably makes it appear worse than it is) but I don't see how...
>
> If there were a simple and futureproof way to tell the option
> parsing loop to notice any feature other than "-b newbranch" was
> used, then such a whitelisting may be a viable way, but there is
> not, and the whitelist condition can become (over time---we are
> talking about futureproofing and not "a filter that happens to match
> today's feature set") just as complex as this blacklisting function
> is (e.g. feature A and feature B when used alone may be compatible
> with the optimization but not when used both), so if we were to use
> this optimization, I think this long list of special-case checks is
> the best we could do.

I'm wondering if a two-stage parse-options invocations could make this
potential maintenance problem more manageable by altogether
eliminating needs_working_tree_merge(). Something very roughly along
the lines of:

    new_branch_and_passive_options = {
        OPT_STRING('b', NULL, ...),
        ...options which can't impact "optimization" decision...
    };
    argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix,
        new_branch_and_passive_options, NULL,
        PARSE_OPT_KEEP_UNKNOWN | PARSE_OPT_KEEP_DASHDASH);

    can_optimize_new_branch = 1;
    for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
        if (argv[i][0] == '-') {
            can_optimize_new_branch = 0;
            break;
        }

    options = {
        ...all other options...
    }
    argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options,
        checkout_usage, PARSE_OPT_KEEP_DASHDASH);

    ...as before...

The can_optimize_new_branch check could, of course, be fooled by a
non-option which starts with a "-", but that would err toward safety
of not optimizing, so shouldn't be a worry.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-26 18:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-24 18:01 [PATCH v1] checkout: optionally speed up "git checkout -b foo" Ben Peart
2018-07-24 18:42 ` Eric Sunshine
2018-07-24 19:45   ` Ben Peart
2018-07-26 15:04     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-26 18:59       ` Eric Sunshine [this message]
2018-07-26 19:08         ` Eric Sunshine
2018-07-24 19:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-24 20:47   ` Ben Peart
2018-07-31 16:39 ` [PATCH v2] checkout: optimize "git checkout -b <new_branch>" Ben Peart
2018-07-31 20:01   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-01 15:10   ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-02 18:02     ` Ben Peart
2018-08-03 15:58       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-06 14:25         ` Ben Peart
2018-08-15 21:05           ` Ben Peart
2018-08-05  8:57       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-16 18:27 ` [PATCH v3] " Ben Peart
2018-08-16 18:37   ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-17 12:37     ` Ben Peart
2018-08-19  1:44       ` Elijah Newren
2018-08-20 13:40         ` Ben Peart
2018-08-20 18:16           ` Elijah Newren
2018-08-21 14:51             ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-30 17:22               ` Elijah Newren
2018-09-04 16:46                 ` Duy Nguyen
2018-08-20 18:31         ` Junio C Hamano
2018-09-18  5:34   ` [PATCH] config doc: add missing list separator for checkout.optimizeNewBranch Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-09-18 16:57     ` Taylor Blau
2018-09-18 17:16       ` Jeff King
2018-09-18 17:20         ` Taylor Blau
2018-09-18 17:13     ` Jeff King
2018-09-19  4:41       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

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=CAPig+cRtUeSCUnUFw0xgXEV7nyBiORZSLfLYfhKWjXxcgHvQmg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
    --cc=Ben.Peart@microsoft.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peartben@gmail.com \
    /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).