Re: [PATCH 2/2] git.c: binary-search builtin commands

[Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>]

2011/2/16 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   2011/2/15 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>   > I did this myself the other day, as I think it simply is a good project
>>   > hygiene.  If this were 1/2 of a series followed by 2/2 that runs binary
>>   > search in the table, that would make it make more sense ;-)
>>
>>   I did think the array was binary-searched and nearly claimed "git-stage
>>   won't work because it's in wrong order".
>
> Heh, that "binary search" was a tongue-in-cheek comment.  I am sorry that
> you took it too seriously.
>
>>   This patch won't give any performance gain, but it would force
>>   people to keep the array in order :-)
>
> That is exactly why I discarded what I did the other day.  Without an
> active mechanism to force the orderedness, such a change simply introduces
> a downside of letting a mistake go unnoticed, without any real upside (as
> you measured and saw no performance gain).
>
> A better project hygine is a good thing to aim for, and I would imagine
> that you could add "--verify-builtin-command-table" as an unadvertised
> option to "git" wrapper, and make t/t0000-basic.sh call it to minimize the
> downside risk.  But without such an active measure to prevent mistakes, we
> would be relying on somebody getting caught on a ticking bomb and
> reporting it, which is not a good tradeoff between risk and reward.

Ah, OK. Just drop this patch. I don't think doing binary search gains
us much anyway.
-- 
Duy