Re: --find-copies-harder finds fewer copies/renames than -C does

[lists@haller-berlin.de (Stefan Haller)]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> lists@haller-berlin.de (Stefan Haller) writes:
> 
> > I had expected --find-copies-harder to still do inexact rename detection
> > among the changed files in the commit in this case, and turn it off only
> > for the unmodified files; I'm not familiar enough with the code to tell
> > whether that would be easy to implement though.
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> 
> Two.  When you can spend unlimited amount of resources, it would feel more
> intuitive if -C -C lifted rename-limit altogether.  On the other hand, in
> a project where the difference does matter (i.e. you have far too many
> candidate sources), it is likely that -C -C without rename limit would run
> out of memory and not produce any result, so automatic lifting of rename
> limit is unacceptable as the default.

But what about the suggestion of falling back to -C if
--find-copies-harder exceeds the rename limit, but -C does not?
Wouldn't that be the desired behaviour?


-- 
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://www.haller-berlin.de/