From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] merge: avoid searching for strategies with fewer than 0 conflicts
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 18:18:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABPp-BHH6isv7iRKee34c1AEJ8JT5iUX7i7j6s9CVbmYN0Ervw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr118dzek.fsf@gitster.g>
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 9:19 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
[...]
> > ... In contrast, if the user did specify
> > --no-commit and the previous strategy succeeded, then we will continue
> > the loop. That seems rather inconsistent, since --no-commit should
> > not affect the choice of strategy.
>
> Yeah, exactly.
>
> > However, I missed two things in my reading. You are correct that I
> > missed the "<=" as opposed to "<" when I wrote my commit message,
> > though that turns out to not matter much due to the second thing. The
> > second thing I missed was part of the code at the beginning of the
> > loop:
> >
> > for (i = 0; !merge_was_ok && i < use_strategies_nr; i++) {
>
> Ahhhh, that explains it. We leave as soon as we find merge_was_ok
> so this patch is not necessary. There is nothing to fix. The
> original was fine as-is.
Right, there was no bug or even optimization opportunity in the
original, it was just confusing...as evidenced by the fact that we
both misread the code.
The fact that we both misread the code, though, suggests there is
something to fix: code readability.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-23 1:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-21 4:38 [PATCH 0/2] Miscellaneous merge fixes Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-21 4:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] merge: only apply autostash when appropriate Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-21 4:52 ` Eric Sunshine
2022-08-21 5:18 ` Elijah Newren
2022-08-21 4:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] merge: avoid searching for strategies with fewer than 0 conflicts Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-21 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-08-22 15:00 ` Elijah Newren
2022-08-22 16:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-08-23 1:18 ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2022-08-23 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Miscellaneous merge fixes Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-23 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] merge: only apply autostash when appropriate Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-23 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] merge: cleanup confusing logic for handling successful merges Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-23 2:42 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] merge: small code readability improvement Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2022-08-23 3:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Miscellaneous merge fixes Elijah Newren
2022-08-24 21:09 ` 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=CABPp-BHH6isv7iRKee34c1AEJ8JT5iUX7i7j6s9CVbmYN0Ervw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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).