Re: [PATCH] interpret_nth_last_branch(): avoid traversing the reflogs twice

Hi,

On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Instead of traversing them twice, we just build a list of branch switches,
pick the one we're interested in, and free the list again.

Isn't the code keeping them all in core, or am I reading the patch wrong?

If you know that you are interested in the nth-from-the-last switch, and
if you are reading from the beginning, you would need to keep at most n 
last switches you have seen in core, wouldn't you?  

That is correct.  But this is such a highly uncritical code path that I'd 
like to keep this simple rather than fast.

Ciao,
Dscho