From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] xdl_merge(): introduce XDL_MERGE_ZEALOUS_ALNUM Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:16:20 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <7v3arxzlke.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Linus Torvalds , Voltage Spike , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 13 12:17:26 2008 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 1JPFc9-00053x-93 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:17:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764740AbYBMLQR (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:16:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1764440AbYBMLQR (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:16:17 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:51430 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1764387AbYBMLQQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:16:16 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2008 11:16:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp010) with SMTP; 13 Feb 2008 12:16:14 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/Q1L8G9c3Q9Erd8PzRKofjCH4Iml/DSBkiFCg5zv vDp0O89fcJezu1 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <7v3arxzlke.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, 12 Feb 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > When a merge conflicts, there are often common lines that are not > > really common, such as empty lines or lines containing a single curly > > bracket. > > > > With XDL_MERGE_ZEALOUS_ALNUM, we use the following heuristics: when a > > hunk does not contain any letters or digits, it is treated as > > conflicting. > > I like the general direction. > > This might need to be loosened further if we want to cover Voltage's > case where the inconveniently common hunk had another line, "int err;", > which had alnums. Perhaps we would want to say "max N alnums" instead > of "no alnums". Maybe even both. As Linus has stated in the other reply, up to three lines between two conflicts could be "merged" with the conflicts by default, because less or equally much screen estate would used. So I am thinking about an interface that is not too painful. Ciao, Dscho