On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 11:16:49AM +0000, Eric Kow wrote: > Eric Kow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: > So one problem is that a file may have different names at different > points. Another related problem (though maybe not for this bug) is that > the same name could mean different files at different points (eeew!). > Could lead to trickiness.
Indeed, this is the complication. I tend to agree with Tuomo (and Tommy) that the current (possibly unrecorded) name is probably best to match against. With regard to no-longer-existing files, their most recent name seems reasonable (which I believe is the current behavior). > One thing we might consider doing is making the 'touching' matcher mean > "match on all files/directories that were called foo at some point in > their lives". I hadn't thought of that. In the common case where there are no two files with the same name in the history, this will almost always do what the user expects, while in the uncommon extra-confusing case where distinct files have shared a name, it'll present that information in a coherent manner. The only catch is that in order to do this we may need to read through the entire history twice. But I guess in the common case we wouldn't have to do so, so it wouldn't slow down the common case, as long as we're clever about it. -- David Roundy _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
