On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Daniel Ferreira (theiostream)
wrote:
> Why exactly would it not be applicable to read_directory_recursively()?
Because that function is a beast (and probably should have "beast" in
the function name).
The function is supposed to read .gitignore, index file and wh
Why exactly would it not be applicable to read_directory_recursively()?
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Michael Haggerty
> wrote:
>> * DIR_ITERATOR_RECURSE -- recurse into subdirectories
>>
>> would make the set of possible options complete.
Michael Haggerty writes:
> I don't think any of this needs to be implemented now, but maybe keep it
> in mind if/when `dir_iterator` gets more users.
OK. One thing that was missing in your list was the opposite of "do
not show directories", i.e. "show only directories". That should
also be eas
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> * DIR_ITERATOR_RECURSE -- recurse into subdirectories
>
> would make the set of possible options complete. If this option is not
> set, then the iteration would be over the entries in a single directory
> without traversing its subdirector
On 03/30/2017 08:08 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty writes:
>
>> I think IN_ORDER really only applies to *binary* trees, not arbitrary
>> trees like a filesystem.
>
> How true. Even if we were giving a sorted output (and dir-iterator
> doesn't and there is no need for it to), dir/
Michael Haggerty writes:
> I think IN_ORDER really only applies to *binary* trees, not arbitrary
> trees like a filesystem.
How true. Even if we were giving a sorted output (and dir-iterator
doesn't and there is no need for it to), dir/ should come before any
of its contents, so for that applic
On 03/29/2017 06:46 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty writes:
>
>> I also realize that I made a goof in my comments about v3 of this patch
>> series. Your new option is not choosing between "depth-first" and
>> "breadth-first". Both types of iteration are depth-first. Really it is
>> c
Michael Haggerty writes:
> I also realize that I made a goof in my comments about v3 of this patch
> series. Your new option is not choosing between "depth-first" and
> "breadth-first". Both types of iteration are depth-first. Really it is
> choosing between pre-order and post-order traversal. So
On 03/29/2017 11:56 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 03/29/2017 02:32 AM, Daniel Ferreira wrote:
>> [...]
> [...]
> The disagreement is not a surprise, because there isn't a corresponding
> coding error in the code below that returns the directory itself in a
> post-order iteration. The net result
On 03/29/2017 02:32 AM, Daniel Ferreira wrote:
> Create an option for the dir_iterator API to iterate over subdirectories
> only after having iterated through their contents. This feature was
> predicted, although not implemented by 0fe5043 ("dir_iterator: new API
> for iterating over a directory t
Create an option for the dir_iterator API to iterate over subdirectories
only after having iterated through their contents. This feature was
predicted, although not implemented by 0fe5043 ("dir_iterator: new API
for iterating over a directory tree", 2016-06-18).
Add the "flags" parameter to dir_it
11 matches
Mail list logo
