From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] attr: map builtin userdiff drivers to well-known extensions Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:33:30 -0800 Message-ID: <7vehw4ia5x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20111216110000.GA15676@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4EEB4F13.2010402@viscovery.net> <20111216192104.GA19924@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Sixt , git@vger.kernel.org, Brandon Casey To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 16 20:33:41 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RbdXG-0006KX-7N for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 20:33:38 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760609Ab1LPTde (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:33:34 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:59288 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752264Ab1LPTdd (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:33:33 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F024B76DF; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:33:32 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=r104sYawFCOIMCzbNX6/bzX7gqI=; b=UDF4uz +TAUvIGU6mihmnCT5ZvTl4XjvymlOkPGLyQOE/+WskB8kBedwaj6UryXaTL2IrGM wXOZwxxLnnYfXoeSTB7LCurUpANAVOmM7gC+etujm6UYJ2ut3OWsgWIjEH4qSXDv 9GJm7mXUrZeoTMXRNRPbWzHMRGbgJ/xyfExDc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=bsf5w5xhd3bCivCsRwKwldvrQ4bUima8 qSfNBDV8S/0D10SEnXWj/SWFtGQlxAEL3IQ9RodqOoBr+vl7PSjxOw8fE+nongm5 Xi+II5aU1pLscGaFcfWRTMJOguZSxhzI3El6yX81CvoYKfUy+B1nUER3OXKyNWLi P61ScyVmPP8= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D5B76DE; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:33:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D51176DD; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:33:32 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20111216192104.GA19924@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:21:04 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D6A6D788-281C-11E1-A220-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > I'm not clear from what you wrote on whether you were saying it is > simply sub-optimal, or whether on balance it is way worse than the > default funcname matching. I think we recently saw that the optional built-in one for C did not even understand a function that returns a pointer, and nobody complained about it for a long time, and what was even more funny was that a patch to fix it got a comment from somebody who wasn't using the optional built-in one saying "The default works fine; what problem are you fixing?". That is clearly one example where the default one is still better than the pattern based one, iow, the pattern based one is way premature to be turned on by default. > And if it is bad on balance, is the right solution to avoid exposing > people to it, or is it to make our patterns better? Can't we do both, by avoid exposing normal users to broken one while people who want to improve the pattern based one work on unbreak it? > I.e., is it fixable, > or is it simply too hard a problem to get right in the general case, and > we shouldn't turn it on by default? I do not think that is the "either-or" question. My impression has been that even if it is fixable, it is too broken and produces worse result than the simple default in its current form.