Paul Mackerras <> writes:

> Hi Thomas,
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 03:17:41PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote:
>> Jens Lehmann <> writes:
>> > Am 29.07.2013 21:37, schrieb Thomas Rast:
>> >> Thomas Rast <> writes:
>> >> 
>> >>> Thomas Rast <> writes:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Now that git log -L has hit master, I figure it's time to discuss the
>> >>>> corresponding change to gitk.
> One thing I worry about is having gitk storing in memory not just the
> history graph but also all the diffs (assuming I have understood
> correctly what you're doing).  Gitk's memory consumption is already
> pretty large.  However, I can't see an alternative at this point.

I don't think there is one.  log -L is pretty much an "all or nothing"
thing at this point.  I suppose if we really found that the diffs are
regularly too big to be manageable for gitk, we could invent a porcelain
mode where 'log -L' just prints the detected commits and corresponding
line ranges, and then have a new option to diff-tree to let it again
filter that range.

But note that ordinary 'git log -L' also buffers the entire set of diffs
within less.  The memory consumption of gitk to hold the same diffs in
memory should be only a small factor of what less uses in the same
scenario.  Furthermore, users will typically ask for a small region of
code (one function, or some such), so the diffs themselves are usually
quite small, nowhere near the size of the full commit diffs.

>> Unfortunately it's turning out to be harder than I hoped.  gitk runs the
>> arguments through git-rev-parse, which only knows that -n gets an
>> unstuck argument.  Consequently, gitk accepts an unstuck -n but only
>> stuck forms of -S and -G.
> Excuse my ignorance, but what do you mean by "stuck" vs. "unstuck"?

Whether the option value is a separate argument in argv, or directly
stuck to the option.

stuck:   gitk -L:foo:main.c
unstuck: gitk -L :foo:main.c

Existing gitk chokes on 'gitk -S foo', but works with 'git -Sfoo'.

Thomas Rast
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to