Match sub-directories or allow globs/regexs with `--ignore-directory`

[andreavaccari]

Hi, thank you for your work on dust. This is a suggestion for improvement. The --ignore-directory flag currently does not match subdirectories. This would be very helpful, for example, to analyze a directory containing many repos, each containing directories to ignore: dust -f -X .git -X node_modules ~/dir-with-many-repos.

Possible improvements are:

• Matching the specified names against a candidate's name instead of its relative path.
• Allowing to specify patterns with globs (**/node_modules) or regexs (.*/node_modules$).

The latter is more complex but more flexible, and would make it so only one flag could/should be specified.

Unfortunately I'm not familiar with Rust. I hope you'll consider implementing this in the future. Thank you!

[bootandy]

So just so I understand running:
dust -X node_modules ~/dir-with-many-repos.

You would like it to ignore ~/dir-with-many-repos/a/node_modules and ~/dir-with-many-repos/other_dir/sub_dir/node_modules ?

I think the above makes sense, but I'd prefer to do it with globs or regexs as in your second suggestion.

I'll add it to the todo list and I'll look at implementing it.

[andreavaccari]

Yes, your example matches my suggestion.

At the moment, to exclude the two directories in your example you would have to run:

dust -X a/node_modules -X other_dir/sub_dir/node_modules ~/dir-with-many-repos

If you had several directories, you'd have to use find -exec or xargs. Being able to do this with dust alone would be great!

[bootandy]

I have just (accidentally) created this feature with this commit 1d1bada

It will mimic the grep -v regex behaviour. Which will allow you to do dust -v node_modules

The commit isn't released yet.

[bootandy]

Fixed with version 0.7

[andreavaccari]

Hi @bootandy, I wanted to confirm that the -v option helped tremendously with my use case.

Could you clarify the following when you have a moment?

• With -e and -v, is it possible to match a pattern against a candidate's relative path instead of just its filename?
• With -e, it's possible to declare multiple patterns. With -v, only the first pattern takes effect. Is this intended?

Thank you!

[bootandy]

@andreavaccari

With -v, only the first pattern takes effect. Is this intended?

No, that appears to be a bug I'll look into that: #188

With -e and -v, is it possible to match a pattern against a candidate's relative path

I hadn't considered relative paths when writing this. I'm not currently sure if that is possible. I'll look into it.