On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 4:15 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> This step looks more like "ow, we could have done the tree:0 support
> that is in 'next' better" than a part of "here is a series to do
> tree:N for non zero value of N".
>
> If that is the case, I'd prefer to see this step polished enough
Matthew DeVore writes:
> The tree:0 filter does not need to traverse the trees that it has
> filtered out, so optimize list-objects and list-objects-filter to skip
> traversing the trees entirely. Before this patch, we iterated over all
> children of the tree, and did nothing for all of them, whi
The tree:0 filter does not need to traverse the trees that it has
filtered out, so optimize list-objects and list-objects-filter to skip
traversing the trees entirely. Before this patch, we iterated over all
children of the tree, and did nothing for all of them, which was
wasteful.
Signed-off-by:
3 matches
Mail list logo
