Hi,
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Harald Nordgren
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Preperatory patch to enable either Tiago Botelho's or my patch, to do
> bisection on first parents / merge commits
It would be nice if you could move some part of the above note into
the commit message (above the ---). For example:
"Make it possible to implement bisecting only on first parents or on
merge commits by passing flags to find_bisection(), instead of just a
find_all boolean".
While at it maybe the subject line of the commit message could start
with "bisect: create 'bisect_flags' parameter ..." so that we can
quickly tell which area of the code it is about.
> bisect.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
> bisect.h | 5 +++--
> builtin/rev-list.c | 6 +++---
> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/bisect.c b/bisect.c
> index a579b50884..d85550fd89 100644
> --- a/bisect.c
> +++ b/bisect.c
> @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ static struct commit_list *best_bisection_sorted(struct
> commit_list *list, int n
> */
> static struct commit_list *do_find_bisection(struct commit_list *list,
> int nr, int *weights,
> - int find_all)
> + int bisect_flags)
I think it's better to use "unsigned int" rather than just "int" for flags.
> {
> int n, counted;
> struct commit_list *p;
[...]
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ extern struct commit_list *filter_skipped(struct
> commit_list *list,
>
> #define BISECT_SHOW_ALL (1<<0)
> #define REV_LIST_QUIET (1<<1)
> +#define BISECT_FIND_ALL (1<<2)
Is BISECT_FIND_ALL really related to the other flags, or is this
mixing rev list flags with bisect flags?
Thanks for working on this,
Christian.
