Re: git-diff on touched files: bug or feature?

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Quite honestly, a script that indiscriminately touches everybody
but only modifies a few is simply broken.  Think about "make".
"git diff" reporting many cache-dirty files is simply reminding
you the brokenness of such a script.

I wouldn't call this "broken", but clearly suboptimal, yes. But for an
occasionnal one-liner (perl -pi -e ... or so), I lose less time
recompiling extra-files than I would writting a cleaner script. "make"
has no way to detect the absence of modification, while git has.

-- 
Matthieu

Hi,

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Quite honestly, a script that indiscriminately touches everybody
but only modifies a few is simply broken.  Think about "make".
"git diff" reporting many cache-dirty files is simply reminding
you the brokenness of such a script.

I wouldn't call this "broken", but clearly suboptimal, yes. But for an
occasionnal one-liner (perl -pi -e ... or so), I lose less time
recompiling extra-files than I would writting a cleaner script. "make"
has no way to detect the absence of modification, while git has.

_You_ can afford compiling them extra-files.

That is _exactly_ what Junio meant by "corner case".

Ciao,
Dscho