Hi, On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:06:21PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 03:25:39AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > wrote:
> > I still don't understand why you think that the current hardcoded > > "descend into all directories, then match all subdirectories against > > foo" is more efficient than "descend into all directories matching * > > (i.e. all directories), then match all subdirectories against > > foo"?... [...] > The misunderstanding, IMHO, appeared mainly due to the fact that I > didn't universally take into account the fact that you don't need to > go deeper than the number of components in the pattern :-( Well, now that the misunderstanding seems resolved -- what's the status on this?... -antrik-
