On 04/27/2017 11:17 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> Maybe turning on this feature by default is the next step instead of
> adding them to bash competition or making them available in plumbing
> commands for the upcoming release.
Hello.
Works for me, please ignore the patch I've sent ;)
Anyhow, nice o
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 02:17:55PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> >> Retire "compaction", and keep "indent" as an experimental feature.
> >> The latter hopefully will be turned on by default in a future
> >> release, but that should be done as a separate step.
>
> Maybe turning on this feature by
picking up this old topic,
with Martin, Marc and SZEDER cc'd,
as we got patch proposals regarding the indent heuristic.
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 4:55 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 12/23/2016 10:17 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Junio C Hamano writes:
>>
>>> I guess both you and Michael are in fa
On 12/23/2016 10:17 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> I guess both you and Michael are in favor of just removing compaction
>> variant without any renames, so let me prepare a reroll and queue
>> that instead. We can flip the default perhaps one release later.
>
> -- >8 --
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 01:17:03PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Junio C Hamano writes:
>>
>> > I guess both you and Michael are in favor of just removing compaction
>> > variant without any renames, so let me prepare a reroll and queue
>> >
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 01:17:03PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
> > I guess both you and Michael are in favor of just removing compaction
> > variant without any renames, so let me prepare a reroll and queue
> > that instead. We can flip the default perhaps one releas
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I guess both you and Michael are in favor of just removing compaction
> variant without any renames, so let me prepare a reroll and queue
> that instead. We can flip the default perhaps one release later.
-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] diff: retire "compaction" heuristics
W
Jeff King writes:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:12:13AM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>> I actually would prefer that we just say "this is the default now" and
>> provide some knob "no-indent-heuristic" or "no-compaction-heuristic"
>> and go with that, I think, since I am pretty sure we're all in
>
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 12:12:13AM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote:
> I actually would prefer that we just say "this is the default now" and
> provide some knob "no-indent-heuristic" or "no-compaction-heuristic"
> and go with that, I think, since I am pretty sure we're all in
> agreement that the heuris
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:12:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Jacob Keller writes:
>>
>> > I don't think we have too many config options that interact in this
>> > way, so I understand that "last writing of a particular configuration"
>>
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:12:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jacob Keller writes:
>
> > I don't think we have too many config options that interact in this
> > way, so I understand that "last writing of a particular configuration"
> > makes sense, but interactions between configs is somethi
Jacob Keller writes:
>> { OPTION_LOWLEVEL_CALLBACK, 0, "compaction-heuristic", NULL,
>> NULL, N_("Use an experimental blank-line-based heuristic to improve diffs"),
>> PARSE_OPT_NOARG, parse_opt_unknown_cb },
>>
>
> The unchanged context line should have its description re-worde
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jacob Keller writes:
>
>> I don't think we have too many config options that interact in this
>> way, so I understand that "last writing of a particular configuration"
>> makes sense, but interactions between configs is something that would
Jacob Keller writes:
> I don't think we have too many config options that interact in this
> way, so I understand that "last writing of a particular configuration"
> makes sense, but interactions between configs is something that would
> have never occurred to me. I'll send a patch to drop the co
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Although I do not think we should spend too much braincycles on this
> one (we should rather just removing the older one soonish), I think
> this patch is going in a wrong direction. I agree that "the last
> one wins" is a bit hard to see (
Jacob Keller writes:
> From: Jacob Keller
>
> The current configuration code for enabling experimental heuristics
> prefers the last-set heuristic in the configuration. However, it is not
> necessarily easy to see what order the configuration will be read. This
> means that it is possible for a
From: Jacob Keller
The current configuration code for enabling experimental heuristics
prefers the last-set heuristic in the configuration. However, it is not
necessarily easy to see what order the configuration will be read. This
means that it is possible for a user to have accidentally enabled
17 matches
Mail list logo
