From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C01AC2BB48 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C20520798 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2408568AbgLNRhD (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 12:37:03 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45698 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2502189AbgLNRgd (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 12:36:33 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-x243.google.com (mail-oi1-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::243]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DEA1C0613D3 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:35:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi1-x243.google.com with SMTP id d27so20048875oic.0 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:35:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/7wQxsmoVl7X/0OTY8qkM7bBNKlzrKB0zbL86HVV0/w=; b=VHAmje1ebxZfi6Wi7Oc2yM93OKEJFje/iyc2znDOVzPCUDhbKxUBPIREkbz6Ef4KSy /XVwjugsElE9beixT+fMqncHwnq3ifHT+wL2+jg7aI550s58R+iIzjhD48HZeKIAz2tm rqo4x9uynBobXHCC4UR4IxEojvqEtAOtXVkmkK3xd1jrEOvdwaa4n1IvllI9mmXiBGDU YrqRnznaIOaOlX+M/0brgU27/VEx+XtUZcguTR+ZX6Qo5P4QVOLf+XcHl2ETq5mDbaQy XnGSLz9Mo1IMHm28mERpF35yZswEI68ITxBDsjJ8MKBE6c8rSKaBFiPeQCg5Iaa4e9Cv cyKw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/7wQxsmoVl7X/0OTY8qkM7bBNKlzrKB0zbL86HVV0/w=; b=q+Rs+DYWaPwwdFVFz0QJ+MvoZmVo00/M7Dtfy9pUB6NYetiwalOqPds4p4SX9SdPU8 Eg2/fBXEXYFZih1qG0iuHlmPzfrsH9Ul/pYAYkrcu/XH2GvbXApm4M1fUEoFGa2zThZG Rp4TzeoIUyQpcB2WQ2YQsJvqJ1S7MLyL60shocQwigxDWqnpbIAH2coZSLienWV9qiq6 vDOmky8/Cm8gWhvy83K/GFCx7BIOqx3BoctNciKjLGilACP3bgNTd5xC+1Fs4ujcUYYp QUyttDhsWnIizjo3XNjqaGcWkjvHpb8z3optMCdJYdrPD9INVDD5RJUcpCM5/GKxOWWf pCZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532oD0wI74oKxtg5yccpOyP09HfETRoHFvmCgjt5OlkyxuNPabSI nFaiQLLBhK1k2ZirdtS9n1rLxGaHODpgES85iN8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzfmNPJp1nsk8Vejhgkc6HRDYkGk1s3OfkBlLMTLmOiaOqPX+BnOC+Dg8OSF/WYwGs0K4GRATJ/TXuQZkviTcc= X-Received: by 2002:aca:e083:: with SMTP id x125mr19207050oig.31.1607967334933; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:35:34 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <84a4d97b-8496-4c83-5d32-19f57e17a871@gmail.com> <7b0aafae-cd57-d4f7-ac85-238471428d24@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7b0aafae-cd57-d4f7-ac85-238471428d24@gmail.com> From: Elijah Newren Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 09:35:23 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] merge-ort: add initial outline for basic rename detection To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 6:33 AM Derrick Stolee wrote: > > On 12/13/2020 2:47 AM, Elijah Newren wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Sorry for two different email responses to the same email... > > > > Addressing the comments on this patchset mean re-submitting > > en/merge-ort-impl, and causing conflicts in en/merge-ort-2 and this > > series en/merge-ort-3. Since gitgitgadget will not allow me to submit > > patches against a series that isn't published by Junio, I'll need to > > ask Junio to temporarily drop both of these series, then later > > resubmit en/merge-ort-2 after he publishes my updates to > > en/merge-ort-impl. Then when he publishes my updates to > > en/merge-ort-2, I'll be able to submit my already-rebased patches for > > en/merge-ort-3. > > Let's chat privately about perhaps creatin > > > A couple extra comments below... > > > >>> + int s, clean = 1; > >>> + > >>> + memset(&combined, 0, sizeof(combined)); > >>> + > >>> + detect_regular_renames(opt, merge_base, side1, 1); > >>> + detect_regular_renames(opt, merge_base, side2, 2); > >> > >> Find the renames in each side's diff. > >> > >> I think the use of "1" and "2" here might be better situated > >> for an enum. Perhaps: > >> > >> enum merge_side { > >> MERGE_SIDE1 = 0, > >> MERGE_SIDE2 = 1, > >> }; > >> > >> (Note, I shift these values to 0 and 1, respectively, allowing > >> us to truncate the pairs array to two entries while still > >> being mentally clear.) > > > > So, after mulling it over for a while, I created a > > > > enum merge_side { > > MERGE_BASE = 0, > > MERGE_SIDE1 = 1, > > MERGE_SIDE2 = 2 > > }; > > > > and I made use of it in several places. I just avoided going to an > > extreme with it (e.g. adding another enum for masks or changing all > > possibly relevant variables from ints to enum merge_side), and used it > > more as a document-when-values-are-meant-to-refer-to-sides-of-the-merge > > kind of thing. Of course, this affects two previous patchsets and not > > just this one, so I'll have to post a _lot_ of new patches... :-) > > I appreciate using names for the meaning behind a numerical constant. > You mentioned in the other thread that this will eventually expand to > a list of 10 entries, which is particularly frightening if we don't > get some control over it now. > > I generally prefer using types to convey meaning as well, but I'm > willing to relax on this because I believe C won't complain if you > pass a literal int into an enum-typed parameter, so the compiler > doesn't help enough in that sense. Yeah, I went through my 'ort' branch with all 10 entries and did a regex search for \b[12]\b throughout merge-ort.c, then considered each one in turn, updating to the new enum where it made sense. Then backported the changes across en/merge-ort-impl and en/merge-ort-3 (and I just /submit-ted the en/merge-ort-3 updates to the list). Took quite a while, of course, but I feel it's in good shape. So, take a look at the new sets of series and let me know what you think. > > Something I missed in my reply yesterday... > > > > Note that mi->clean is NOT from struct merge_result. It is from > > struct merged_info, and in that struct it IS defined as "unsigned > > clean:1", i.e. it is a true boolean. The merged_info.clean field is > > used to determine whether a specific path merged cleanly. > > > > "clean" from struct merge_result is whether the entirety of the merge > > was clean or not. It's almost a boolean, but allows for a > > "catastrophic problem encountered" value. I added the following > > comment: > > /* > > * Whether the merge is clean; possible values: > > * 1: clean > > * 0: not clean (merge conflicts) > > * <0: operation aborted prematurely. (object database > > * unreadable, disk full, etc.) Worktree may be left in an > > * inconsistent state if operation failed near the end. > > */ > > > > This also means that I either abort and return a negative value, or I > > can continue treating merge_result's "clean" field as a boolean. > > Having this comment helps a lot! > > > But again, this isn't new to this patchset; it affects the patchset > > before the patchset before this one. > > Right, when I had the current change checked out, I don't see the > patch that introduced the 'clean' member (though, I _could_ have > blamed to find out). Instead, I just got confused and thought it > worth a question. Your comment prevents this question in the future. Yeah, definitely worth the question. I've been buried in merge-recursive.c & related areas so long that I've forgotten that certain things are weird or surprising on first look. The more of those we can flag and document, the better.