GNU bug report logs - #61038
30.0.50; `project-query-replace-regexp' also attempts search and replace in auto-save files

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
To: Mickey Petersen <mickey <at> masteringemacs.org>
Cc: 61038 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#61038: 30.0.50; `project-query-replace-regexp' also attempts search and replace in auto-save files
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 17:50:29 +0200

On 26/01/2023 11:13, Mickey Petersen wrote:
> 
> Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru> writes:
> 
>> On 25/01/2023 22:34, Mickey Petersen wrote:
>>
>>> (Actually this issue also afflicts auto-save files in my Emacs.)
>>> And the files in question are not committed to the index, nor are
>>> they
>>> part of the git tree. So they're just stray files that happen to be
>>> important (backup, auto save) to Emacs.
>>> It seems odd that you'd want to search and replace those by default,
>>> particularly when Emacs is well aware of the fact that they are indeed
>>> backups or auto saves of other files used by that instance of Emacs.
>>
>> I'm asking why they are not in your .gitignore already. They must get
>> in the way of operations such as 'git status', or 'git add *', or 'git
>> commit -a', or just in the way of shell completion for 'git add ...'.
>>
> 
> Let's assume I'm simplifying a more complex workflow to aid with the
> bug report.

Okay.

> There are many legitimate reasons for having binary files -- large
> ones too -- in a repository. Though it's uncommon with git, as it does
> a poor job handling them.
> 
> There are also legitimate reasons for not having expansive ignore
> files, particularly with version control systems that lack the
> granularity of Git and its ilk.
> 
> Nevertheless, knowing that untracked are also considered part of the
> project, I can now set `project-vc-include-untracked' to nil to at
> least resolve this. It would seem I was not the only one who chafed at
> this edge case.

You can also customize project-vc-ignores to fine-tune which additional 
file to skip specifically (whether tracked or not).

But if "skip untracked" suits your mental model well, even better (it 
also increases file listing's performance).

As a default behavior, though, I think it's problematic because one 
might work for a significant amount of time on a bunch of new files 
before committing them. Depends on a workflow.

>>> So, yes, `grep-find-ignored-files' (or a project.el equivalent) should
>>> indeed exist.
>>
>> grep-find-ignored-files is a real user option already. You can also
>> use project-vc-ignores, but it's nil by default.
>>
>> A couple of reasons not to use grep-find-ignored-files patterns by default:
>>
>> - Some users might be actually looking for one of those files, and
>>    would get surprised that while the Git repository lists them fine
>>    (perhaps they even checked in such file; maybe they're using unusual
>>    file naming schemes), but our project backend does not.
>>
>> - Every addition to the ignored patterns is a minor but steady
>>    performance hit. grep-find-ignored-files has 61 element by
>>    default. Dropping all of those into project--vc-list-files can
>>    create a performance hit of an order of a magnitude. E.g. in my
>>    testing the time to list the files in gecko-dev went up from 1s to
>>   about 5s.
> 
> Sure. But `git-grep(1)' will ignore binary files by default, for example.

Hmm, I think in our case the step which will ignore the binary files is 
the search program. So (project-files) will include them in the listing, 
but both Grep and Ripgrep will skip them during the search.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.