Barret Rhoden writes:
> Though the old heuristic is pretty basic - really just a couple lines
> -
> and it may help to see it before looking at a more complicated
> version.
OK, then.
Thanks.
On 4/13/19 11:54 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Two thoughts.
- Unless the 'old heuristic' is still available as an option after
this step, a series that first begins with the 'old heuristic'
and then later replaces it with the 'new heuristic' feels
somewhat wasteful of reviewer resourc
> - I wonder if the hash used here can replace what is used in
>diffcore-delta.c as an improvement (or obviously vice versa), as
>using two (or more) ad-hoc fingerprinting function without having
>a clear reason why we need two instead of a unified one feels
>like a bad idea.
Hi J
Barret Rhoden writes:
> This replaces the heuristic used to identify lines from ignored commits
> with one that finds likely candidate lines in the parent's version of
> the file.
>
> The old heuristic simply assigned lines in the target to the same line
> number (plus offset) in the parent. The
This replaces the heuristic used to identify lines from ignored commits
with one that finds likely candidate lines in the parent's version of
the file.
The old heuristic simply assigned lines in the target to the same line
number (plus offset) in the parent. The new function uses a
fingerprinting
5 matches
Mail list logo
