From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Allow git-apply to ignore the hunk headers (AKA recountdiff)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:35:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vfxr29zju.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200806242108.16379.trast@student.ethz.ch> (Thomas Rast's message of "Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:08:15 +0100")
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch> writes:
> diff --git a/builtin-apply.c b/builtin-apply.c
> index c497889..34c220f 100644
> --- a/builtin-apply.c
> +++ b/builtin-apply.c
> @@ -153,6 +153,7 @@ struct patch {
> unsigned int is_binary:1;
> unsigned int is_copy:1;
> unsigned int is_rename:1;
> + unsigned int recount:1;
> struct fragment *fragments;
> char *result;
> size_t resultsize;
Why doesn't anybody find this quite wrong?
What is a "struct patch"? It describes a change to a single file
(i.e. information contained from one "diff --git" til next "diff --git"),
groups the hunks (called "fragments") together and holds the postimage
after applying these hunks. Is this new "recount" field a per file
attribute?
> + fragment->oldpos = 2;
> + fragment->oldlines = fragment->newlines = 0;
Why is this discarding the position information?
It is none of this function's business. The ONLY THING this function
should do is to discard fragment->oldlines and fragment->newlines, count
the contents and update these two fields, and nothing else. Touching
oldpos, leading and other things is an absolute no-no.
> @@ -1013,6 +1058,9 @@ static int parse_fragment(char *line, unsigned long size,
> offset = parse_fragment_header(line, len, fragment);
> if (offset < 0)
> return -1;
> + if (offset > 0 && patch->recount &&
> + recount_diff(line + offset, size - offset, fragment))
> + return -1;
And recount should not cause parse_fragment() to fail out either. If you
miscounted, the codepath that follows this part knows how to handle broken
patch correctly anyway.
I think I've already mentioned the above two points when this was
originally posted.
Somewhat disgusted...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-24 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-23 20:21 [PATCH] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode Thomas Rast
2008-05-24 1:24 ` Ping Yin
2008-05-29 15:37 ` Thomas Rast
2008-05-29 16:12 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-05-29 19:10 ` Thomas Rast
2008-05-29 19:16 ` Thomas Rast
2008-05-29 18:58 ` Jeff King
2008-05-30 9:49 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-05-30 10:46 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-05-30 12:21 ` Thomas Rast
2008-05-30 21:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-01 0:41 ` [RFC PATCH] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode v2 Thomas Rast
2008-06-01 14:50 ` [RFC PATCH] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode v2.1 Thomas Rast
2008-06-01 15:14 ` Jeff King
2008-06-05 1:46 ` [RFC PATCH] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode v2 Jeff King
2008-06-05 7:53 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-05 8:11 ` Jeff King
2008-06-05 9:04 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-05 9:20 ` Jeff King
2008-06-05 9:38 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-05 9:46 ` Jeff King
2008-06-05 8:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-05 8:56 ` Jeff King
2008-06-05 10:28 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-06 5:10 ` Jeff King
2008-06-06 6:03 ` Jeff King
2008-06-08 22:33 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-08 23:06 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-06 14:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-08 22:18 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-08 23:02 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-05 12:38 ` [WIP PATCH v2] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode Thomas Rast
2008-06-08 22:32 ` [PATCH v3] " Thomas Rast
2008-06-08 23:19 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-09 5:46 ` Johan Herland
2008-06-09 12:29 ` Jeff King
2008-06-09 16:13 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-09 19:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-09 17:31 ` Johan Herland
2008-06-09 20:17 ` Jeff King
2008-06-09 21:19 ` Johan Herland
2008-06-10 11:05 ` Jeff King
2008-06-11 9:02 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-12 4:49 ` Jeff King
2008-06-12 6:55 ` Thomas Rast
2008-06-12 7:13 ` Jeff King
2008-06-13 15:48 ` [PATCH v4] " Thomas Rast
2008-06-23 18:38 ` Jeff King
2008-06-23 18:54 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-23 19:57 ` Jeff King
2008-06-23 21:16 ` apply --recount, was " Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-24 5:09 ` Jeff King
2008-06-24 19:07 ` [PATCH 0/3] Manual editing for 'add' and 'add -p' Thomas Rast
2008-06-24 19:53 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-06-24 19:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] Allow git-apply to ignore the hunk headers (AKA recountdiff) Thomas Rast
2008-06-24 23:35 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2008-06-25 5:45 ` Jeff King
2008-06-27 17:43 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-06-24 19:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] git-add: introduce --edit (to edit the diff vs. the index) Thomas Rast
2008-06-24 19:08 ` [PATCH 3/3] git-add--interactive: manual hunk editing mode Thomas Rast
2008-06-10 11:19 ` [PATCH v3] " Andreas Ericsson
2008-06-05 9:02 ` [PATCH] " Thomas Rast
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7vfxr29zju.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).