From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Teach Git about the patience diff algorithm Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:42:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <20081104004001.GB29458@artemis.corp> <20081104083042.GB3788@artemis.corp> <20081104152351.GA21842@artemis.corp> <20090101204652.GA26128@chistera.yi.org> <20090102105537.GA14691@localhost> <20090102105856.GB14691@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Adeodato_Sim=F3?= , Johannes Schindelin , Pierre Habouzit , davidel@xmailserver.org, Francis Galiegue , Git ML To: Clemens Buchacher X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 02 17:44:28 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LIn8G-0007yv-Em for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:44:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756989AbZABQm6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:42:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756811AbZABQm6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:42:58 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:53377 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756667AbZABQm5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:42:57 -0500 Received: from imap1.linux-foundation.org (imap1.linux-foundation.org [140.211.169.55]) by smtp1.linux-foundation.org (8.14.2/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id n02Gg6Sc020218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:42:07 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by imap1.linux-foundation.org (8.13.5.20060308/8.13.5/Debian-3ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id n02Gg4tc003498; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:42:04 -0800 X-X-Sender: torvalds@localhost.localdomain In-Reply-To: <20090102105856.GB14691@localhost> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.924 required=5 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,OSDL_HEADER_SUBJECT_BRACKETED X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4-osdl_revision__1.47__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: lf$Revision: 1.188 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.63 on 140.211.169.13 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, Clemens Buchacher wrote: > > Only two choices, and I still get it wrong. The diffs should be labeled the > other way around, of course. Yes, this one is a real patience diff change, but it's also the same one that I've seen in the google fanboi findings. What google did _not_ show was any real-life examples, or anybody doing any critical analysis. So I was hoping for something else than a single "in this case patience diff works really well". I was hoping to see what it does in real life. But when I tried it on the kernel archive, I get a core dump. For example, in real life, files are bigger, and unique lines are not necessarily always common (generated files, whatever). Depending on unique line ordering may work fine in 95% of all cases, but do you know that it works fine in general? Does it work when 50% of lines are unique? I believe it does. Does ti work when just 1% of lines are unique? I just don't know. And I haven't seen _any_ real critical analysis of it. Anywhere. Linus