On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:34 AM, Stefan Beller <[email protected]> wrote: > @@ -139,7 +140,8 @@ static size_t common_prefix_len(const struct pathspec > *pathspec) > PATHSPEC_LITERAL | > PATHSPEC_GLOB | > PATHSPEC_ICASE | > - PATHSPEC_EXCLUDE); > + PATHSPEC_EXCLUDE | > + PATHSPEC_ATTR);
Hmm.. common_prefix_len() has always been a bit relaxing and can cover more than needed. It's for early pruning. Exact pathspec matching _will_ be done later anyway. Is that obvious? I'm wondering if we need to add a line or two in the big comment code before this statement. I'm thinking it is and we probably don't need more comments... -- Duy
