martinvonz added inline comments. INLINE COMMENTS
> context.py:484 > self._node = node > + self._maybe_filtered = maybe_filtered > Add a comment explaining what this attribute means, such as "indicates that this changeset is visible regardless of filtering". Actually, maybe it's better to name the property something like `filter_agnostic`? > indygreg wrote in context.py:503 > Before I accept more of this series, I'd like others to think about the > potential alternative solution of passing in or storing a reference to the > changelog on `basectx`/`changectx`. The reason is that a lot of methods are > calling `repo.changelog` and this can be expensive. I suspect we'd get a > handful of random performance wins if we cached the changelog instance on > each `basectx`. We also wouldn't need to litter the code with a bunch of > conditional `repo.unfiltered()` calls since we'd already have an appropriate > changelog instance stored in the instance. > > Thoughts? That would make `ctx.children()` incorrect, right? I still wonder if the "visible" filter should be removed and (so there would be no `--hidden`, and no annoying message telling you use that flag). We would need to figure out what e.g. `hg log -r 'head()'` and `hg log -r x::` should do (to not include extinct heads) and how to make it easy for the user to get either behavior. Perhaps we would let `head()` be the visible heads and add a new `allheads()` to get all? That's obviously a much larger discussion and maybe a topic for the next sprint instead. REPOSITORY rHG Mercurial CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7483/new/ REVISION DETAIL https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D7483 To: marmoute, #hg-reviewers Cc: martinvonz, indygreg, mercurial-devel _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
