Re: [REVISED PATCH 2/6] Introduce commit notes

Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] writes:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

quoted

...
But the real problem of this approach of course is that this is
not reliable and can get a false match.  You can find your
beginning NUL in the SHA-1 part of one entry, and terminating
NUL later in the SHA-1 part of next entry, and you will never
notice.

[ I didn't react to this in your first email, because I thought you were 
  talking about your "use the rules for the ASCII part", and thought you 
  talked about how *that* was not reliable and can get a false match). But 
  it seems that you were actually talking about the NUL character test ]

Nope, wrong.

Why? Because there must always be a NUL *between* different SHA1's. 
There's *always* a NUL character that precedes a SHA1. So when you have 
two NUL characters (with no other NUL's between them), you *know* that 
they cannot be from two different SHA1's. If the first one was from an 
earlier SHA1, then the second one is *guaranteed* to be the one that 
happens *before* the next SHA1.

See?

Ok.  As usual, you are more right than I am ;-).