[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Introducing 'unrecognized and 'ignored

From: Eric S. Raymond
Subject: Re: Introducing 'unrecognized and 'ignored
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 06:46:14 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11)

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>:
> I don't understand: CVS's status command recurses just fine and so does
> MetaCVS's (not that it matters since this backend can be dropped any day

Hm.  On inspection, you're right.  Looking at the history, I used to have it
doing tree traversal, then discovered I could get rid of that necessity by 
removing the -l option from the command.

> The only backends which might need to do tree traversal manually (AFAIK)
> are RCS and SCCS, of course, but I think it's fine for them to do the
> traversal by hand in the backend code.

And now they are in fact the only backends doing that.

> Maybe we're not talking about the same "tree traversal".  But AFAICT,
> vc-dired uses `ls' somewhere, where I think it should neither use `ls'
> nor `directory-files' nor anything equivalent in the generic code.

I think this is no longer true.  I looked for directory-files throughout
the VC files; none of the uses are within vc-dired-hook anymore,
except in Arch where they're necessary because of the odd way Arch
represents working-directory state.

So I think we've actually achieved what you want.

> That would also allow us to get rid of vc-directory-exclusion-list.

Not unless we want to wire an equivalent back into speedbar.el.
It's also genuinely needed in vc-next-action.
                <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]