From: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web•de>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>, git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] parseopt: check for duplicate long names and numerical options
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2026 12:28:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7c221132-c2ac-4c6f-9d89-72677a74beb5@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260228105849.GA3626520@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On 2/28/26 11:58 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 10:19:16AM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:
>
>> +static void parse_options_check_harder(const struct option *opts)
>> +{
>> + struct strset long_names = STRSET_INIT;
>> + for (; opts->type != OPTION_END; opts++) {
>> + if (opts->long_name) {
>> + if (!strset_add(&long_names, opts->long_name))
>> + optbug(opts, "long name already used");
>> + }
>> + }
>> + BUG_if_bug("invalid 'struct option'");
>> + strset_clear(&long_names);
>> +}
>
> I confirmed on my silly pathological case that invoking rev-parse with a
> real option shows no slowdown, and we now pay the same 10ms cost to show
> "-h".
>
> Your other email made me wonder how the sorted-array solution might
> perform (patch below). It shaves off 2ms of those 10. Probably not worth
> caring about for "-h" output (which is already spending another 5-10ms
> to generate the output, versus a normal parse).
Curious; sorting performs worse on my machine (Apple M1, 1 is 2cc719175,
2 is patch 2 v2, 3 is your patch on top):
Benchmark 1: ./git_main rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input
Time (mean ± σ): 77.5 ms ± 0.4 ms [User: 73.1 ms, System: 3.5 ms]
Range (min … max): 76.8 ms … 78.5 ms 37 runs
Warning: Ignoring non-zero exit code.
Benchmark 2: ./git_strset rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input
Time (mean ± σ): 82.6 ms ± 0.3 ms [User: 77.7 ms, System: 3.9 ms]
Range (min … max): 82.1 ms … 83.7 ms 34 runs
Warning: Ignoring non-zero exit code.
Benchmark 3: ./git_qsort rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input
Time (mean ± σ): 85.6 ms ± 0.2 ms [User: 81.2 ms, System: 3.5 ms]
Range (min … max): 85.3 ms … 86.5 ms 33 runs
Warning: Ignoring non-zero exit code.
Summary
./git_main rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input ran
1.07 ± 0.01 times faster than ./git_strset rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input
1.10 ± 0.01 times faster than ./git_qsort rev-parse --parseopt -- -h <input
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-28 11:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-27 0:13 [Bug] duplicated long-form options go unnoticed Junio C Hamano
2026-02-27 19:27 ` [PATCH 1/2] pack-objects: remove duplicate --stdin-packs definition René Scharfe
2026-02-27 19:27 ` [PATCH 2/2] parseopt: check for duplicate long names and numerical options René Scharfe
2026-02-27 22:50 ` Jeff King
2026-02-27 23:08 ` Jeff King
2026-02-27 23:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-28 9:19 ` René Scharfe
2026-02-28 9:19 ` [PATCH v2 " René Scharfe
2026-02-28 10:58 ` Jeff King
2026-02-28 11:28 ` René Scharfe [this message]
2026-03-02 18:24 ` Jeff King
2026-03-01 14:33 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7c221132-c2ac-4c6f-9d89-72677a74beb5@web.de \
--to=l.s.r@web$(echo .)de \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox