On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 03:11:08AM -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 09:35:45AM +0200, Martin Liška wrote: > > Do we really need a commit integer numbers after the transition? I know > > we're used to it. > > But git commit hash provides that same. > > Revision numbers are nice short text strings, and from a revision number > you can see approximately when it happened, and from two revision numbers > on the same branch you can trivially tell which one is older. Those are > nice features. But we can live without it, IMO.
Since I do many bisections a day, losing this capability would be Very Bad. Without it, there's no range, and without a range, there's nothing to _bisect_. I bisect by hand, so if I have cc1plus.250000 (good) and cc1plus.260000 (bad), I know the commit I'm looking for is within that range, and I can easily split the range, and it's at most log n steps. Whereas if we had e.g. cc1plus.de28b0 and cc1plus.a9bd4d, I couldn't do it anymore. -- Marek Polacek • Red Hat, Inc. • 300 A St, Boston, MA
