git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jochen Sprickerhof <jochen@sprickerhof.de>
To: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] add -p: coalesce hunks before testing applicability
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 19:16:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180923171626.GN26251@vis> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d6a8f77b-0a83-90ae-a7fb-a3954ac3b346@talktalk.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1231 bytes --]

* Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> [2018-09-13 11:20]:
>Yes in the long term we want to be able to coalesce edited hunks, but I
>think it is confusing to call coalesce_overlapping_hunks() at the moment
>as it will not coalesce the edited hunks.

I would see it as a first step into that direction.

>I think that if you split a hunk, edit the first subhunk, transforming a
>trailing context line to a deletion then try if you try to stage the
>second subhunk it will fail. With your patch the edit will succeed as
>the second subhunk is skipped when testing the edited patch. Then when
>you try to stage the second subhunk it will fail as it's leading context
>will contradict the trailing lines of the edited subhunk. With the old
>method the edit failed but didn't store up trouble for the future.

Agreed. I guess the question is if you assume a hunk to be applied or 
skipped as the default. You can still find enough cases where neither 
the current nor the patched version works. I stumbled upon the one case 
where I wanted to stage only one part of a split hunk and that one 
worked after my patch. I leave it up to you if the added benefit 
overweights the stored up trouble.

Cheers Jochen

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-23 17:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-28  8:58 [PATCH] add -p: coalesce hunks before testing applicability Jochen Sprickerhof
2018-08-28 18:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-30 13:47   ` Phillip Wood
2018-08-30 14:51     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-09-03 19:01     ` Jochen Sprickerhof
2018-09-13 10:20       ` Phillip Wood
2018-09-23 17:16         ` Jochen Sprickerhof [this message]
2019-03-22 14:06         ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-06-02 14:17           ` Phillip Wood
2019-06-03 13:40             ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-06-03 14:59               ` Phillip Wood
2019-06-04 13:32                 ` Johannes Schindelin

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=20180923171626.GN26251@vis \
    --to=jochen@sprickerhof.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).