Re: [RFC] git rev-contains [Was: merge -s ffonly]
From: Uwe Kleine-König <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:45:27
Hello Deskin, On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 10:30:50AM -0400, Deskin Miller wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 08:58:15PM +0200, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=F6nig_ wrote:quoted
quoted
+ if test -n "$(git rev-list $1..HEAD)"I already wrote similar tests and I wonder if this couldn't be done in a new builtin command more effectively. Something like git rev-contains HEAD "$1" . I expect it to be faster and maybe it prevents a command line overflow?! [...]I'm not sure this warrants a builtin; seems like test is perfectly capable of doing what you want: if test '(' -n "$(git rev-list --max-count=1 $1..HEAD)" ')' -a \ '(' -z "$(git rev-list --max-count=1 HEAD..$1)" ')' The second check is needed to ensure that the commits actually have an ancestor-descendant relationship.
This is needed for the original patch, too, isn't it.
And --max-count means your command line won't overflow.
ah, --max-count is a nice idea. Topgit could benefit from it.
Or what about this: if test "$(git merge-base $1 HEAD)" = "$(git rev-parse $1)"
It's not entirely clear to me, this works in general, because a merge-base isn't unique. It should work in this case, though. Best regards Uwe