* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Jeff King @ 2007-10-18 3:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: david; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Luke Lu, Christer Weinigel, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710172002020.10276@asgard.lang.hm>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:03:51PM -0700, david@lang.hm wrote:
>> This might matter if I'm comparing non-diff code to diff code. But in a
>> diff, _everything_ is indented by exactly one space, so it all lines up.
>> Is there something I'm missing?
>
> if the code uses a tab and the patch uses 8 spaces the two will not line up
> in the diff becouse in the diff output the tab is 'only 7 spaces;
>
> useing one or the other isn't the problem, it's the mixing of the two.
Yes, obviously. The people who advocate mixing really _are_ objectively
wrong. But I was talking about all-spaces versus all-tabs.
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: david @ 2007-10-18 3:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Luke Lu, Christer Weinigel, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071018024553.GA5186@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 05:59:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> It happens. We do de-spacification in the kernel occasionally when it is
>> an annoyance. Usually it shows up in patches, though - exactly because
>> code which adds spaces instead of tabs won't line up correctly in the
>> diff.
>
> You have made this claim several times, and I really don't understand
> it. If I have 8 spaces, then a diff line will have either " ", "+", or
> "-" followed by 8 spaces. If I use a hard tab, then the tab will end up
> only taking up 7 spaces because of the nature of tabs.
>
> This might matter if I'm comparing non-diff code to diff code. But in a
> diff, _everything_ is indented by exactly one space, so it all lines up.
> Is there something I'm missing?
if the code uses a tab and the patch uses 8 spaces the two will not line
up in the diff becouse in the diff output the tab is 'only 7 spaces;
useing one or the other isn't the problem, it's the mixing of the two.
David Lang
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Jeff King @ 2007-10-18 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Luke Lu, Christer Weinigel, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0710171753020.26902@woody.linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 05:59:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> It happens. We do de-spacification in the kernel occasionally when it is
> an annoyance. Usually it shows up in patches, though - exactly because
> code which adds spaces instead of tabs won't line up correctly in the
> diff.
You have made this claim several times, and I really don't understand
it. If I have 8 spaces, then a diff line will have either " ", "+", or
"-" followed by 8 spaces. If I use a hard tab, then the tab will end up
only taking up 7 spaces because of the nature of tabs.
This might matter if I'm comparing non-diff code to diff code. But in a
diff, _everything_ is indented by exactly one space, so it all lines up.
Is there something I'm missing?
> So it doesn't matter *which* one you use (all spaces or all tabs) in that
> sense.
Yes, I agree with that (even with an all-tabs policy, there are still
mangled and incorrect patches that come in -- and the maintainer rejects
or fixes them).
Which was what I was trying to point out with my question (though I was
also curious to hear your answer): all-space versus all-tab is largely a
matter of preference. And that means that people who want git to change
to _their_ preference are just being silly.
> And smaller *is* faster. Do something like this on the kernel:
>
> GIT_PAGER= time git grep sched_fair
>
> and then do the same thing with the kernel sources blown up by 20% by
> de-tabification. Guess which one is 20% slower?
I was about to tell you that you're full of it, but there really is a
slowdown:
$ cd linux-2.6
$ GIT_PAGER= time git grep sched_fair >/dev/null
0.34user 0.94system 0:01.30elapsed 98%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+7548minor)pagefaults 0swaps
$ find . -name .git -prune -o -type f | xargs perl -pi -e 's/\t/ /g'
$ git-commit -a -m de-tabify
$ git-repack -a -d
$ GIT_PAGER= time git grep sched_fair >/dev/null
0.42user 1.06system 0:01.54elapsed 96%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+7591minor)pagefaults 0swaps
It's actually about 16%.
Gah, I can't believe I've not only been sucked into a tab vs spaces
discussion, but now I've actually wasted time doing a performance
comparison on it.
As an aside, that commit was enough to trigger a "git-gc --auto", which
was my first experience with it. It's actually kind of annoying
(especially since I was about to repack -a -d).
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: bug: origin refs updated too soon locally
From: Perry Wagle @ 2007-10-18 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Perry Wagle; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <8CEF6150-4BE7-4B4D-B58C-12CE4671007E@cs.indiana.edu>
I take it back. A git-pull is not a workaround if the ref moved on
the remote end.
-- Perry
On Oct 17, 2007, at 6:35 PM, Perry Wagle wrote:
> If I clone a remote repository, make a few commits, push them to
> the remote repository, and the update hook on the remote repository
> rejects them (exit 1), the local origin refs are still updated as
> if the push had gone through. The workaround is to do a pull to
> set the origin refs back.
>
> -- Perry
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply
* bug: origin refs updated too soon locally
From: Perry Wagle @ 2007-10-18 1:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
If I clone a remote repository, make a few commits, push them to the
remote repository, and the update hook on the remote repository
rejects them (exit 1), the local origin refs are still updated as if
the push had gone through. The workaround is to do a pull to set the
origin refs back.
-- Perry
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno
From: David Symonds @ 2007-10-18 1:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin
Cc: Linus Torvalds, Geert Bosch, Wincent Colaiuta, Johan Herland, git,
Marius Storm-Olsen, Christian Couder, Ren? Scharfe, Junio Hamano
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710180045160.25221@racer.site>
On 18/10/2007, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Well, this has been debated to death, but I actually think that "skip"
> > is a good choice, exactly because it's an action.
>
> Could we, _please_, first decide if the implementation has merits, and
> just apply it as is in that case? We can rename it whatever anybody likes
> later, and we can paint the bikeshed brown if you want to.
I figured with something like this, it'd be a lot easier to get the
colour right first, since command UI is harder to repaint if it gets
widely adopted. Anyway, I think the patch itself is a very good
feature.
Dave.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2007-10-18 0:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King; +Cc: Luke Lu, Christer Weinigel, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071018003256.GA5062@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Jeff King wrote:
>
> In what way does an all-space model cause people to accidentally add
> tabs, but an all-tab model does not cause people to accidentally add
> spaces?
It happens. We do de-spacification in the kernel occasionally when it is
an annoyance. Usually it shows up in patches, though - exactly because
code which adds spaces instead of tabs won't line up correctly in the
diff.
So it doesn't matter *which* one you use (all spaces or all tabs) in that
sense. But clearly tabs are *way* more common at least in any UNIX
project, and tabs really do have the advantage of being smaller.
And smaller *is* faster. Do something like this on the kernel:
GIT_PAGER= time git grep sched_fair
and then do the same thing with the kernel sources blown up by 20% by
de-tabification. Guess which one is 20% slower?
And whoever said that disk space doesn't matter doesn't know what he is
talking about. Disk space most *definitely* matters. Do the above test
with a cold-cache case, and think what 20% more IO does to you (or 20%
less disk cache).
But no, the size issues are secondary, I'm not claiming anything else.
Although I do suspect that historically, they have been primary, and have
been the thing that has resulted in the fact that tabs are so commonly
used.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Jeff King @ 2007-10-18 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds; +Cc: Luke Lu, Christer Weinigel, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0710170849590.26902@woody.linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 08:53:55AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Well, we just established that all-space is perfect, look-wise.
>
> But we also established that an all-space model is not stable, because any
> unix developers will start adding tabs instead of spaces.
In what way does an all-space model cause people to accidentally add
tabs, but an all-tab model does not cause people to accidentally add
spaces?
-Peff
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Christer Weinigel @ 2007-10-18 0:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710180040320.25221@racer.site>
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:44:22 +0100 (BST)
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
> > I'm not that invisible am I?
> >
> > cd linux-2.6.22.7
> > find . -type f | xargs egrep -il "weinigel" | wc -l
> > 17
>
> File or directory not found.
>
> We are not Linux specific here. Besides, I was talking about _git_
> source code, just in case I did not make myself clear.
You do not have a sense of humor, do you? And you elided the paragraph
where I said that I haven't contributed anything to git so far. :-/
> > [...] and privately I use CVS just because I started using CVS ten
> > years ago and haven't bothered to change.
>
> I wonder why you have to leave your hideout and comment on the source
> code of _git_, then. I mean, why do _you_ care? (It should have
> become apparent to you that _we_ care, so it looks even more like you
> wanted to dictate a policy on git, which you have no business with.)
Where did I say that I'm not interested in git? If I weren't I
wouldn't have been reading this mailing list since it was first
created. The reason I don't use git is a lack of time. Professionally
I usually have no need to use git since my employer doesn't use it.
On my own time, I haven't even had time and energy to switch away from
CVS, even though I ought to have done that years ago. I dabble a bit
with git, mercurial, org bitkeeper (or did at least) when I need to
access something out on the net which is stored in such a repository,
but I haven't switched any of my projects over to using anything else.
I'm definitely interested in git, and it's interesting to read the
mailing list to see where git is going. And I'd definitely like git to
move in a direction where it's usable for me, or even better, where I
can recommend it to my (often Windows-only) colleagues.
And once again you cut out the part where I said that git is Junio's
baby, he decides what goes into the main git tree, and if he says 8
wide hard tabs, that it is. I haven't argued against that at all. So
I'm wondering why you are trying to project things I haven't
said on me.
/Christer (pissing contensts are silly, so why the hell am I getting
involved in one?)
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2007-10-17 23:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin
Cc: Geert Bosch, David Symonds, Wincent Colaiuta, Johan Herland, git,
Marius Storm-Olsen, Christian Couder, Ren? Scharfe, Junio Hamano
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710180045160.25221@racer.site>
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> Could we, _please_, first decide if the implementation has merits, and
> just apply it as is in that case? We can rename it whatever anybody likes
> later, and we can paint the bikeshed brown if you want to.
I thought everybody really agreed that being able to skip commits that you
cannot say good/bad about is a feature worth doing?
Right now we actually have some docs in the man-page about doing that
avoidance manually, so it's not like it's debatable whether this issue
comes up. It most definitely does come up.
Does anybody really think it's not a good feature? And I've not seen
negative comments about the implementation either apart from some small
details that I think got fixed up already (but maybe the complaints were
all hidden by the shed color discussions ;)
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2007-10-17 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christer Weinigel; +Cc: Johannes Schindelin, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071018011734.7b636141@localhost.localdomain>
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
> BTW, how serious is the problem with deltifying when there are a lot of
> spaces that David Kastrup mentioned?
I suspect it works quite well in practice.
But we've had to tweak the xdiff code before, and the hash calculations
for bucket size limits. If somebody actually points out a problem case, we
can probably tweak it again.
> Wouldn't it be a problem when people put ASCII graphics in comments or
> just have comments like /*********************************/ in their
> code?
In general, *any* situation where you have tons of character sequences
that are the same (and here it's not the characters *themselves* that have
to be the same - it's the *sequence* that has to be the same, so it's not
about repeating the same character over and over per se: it's about
repeating a certain block of characters many many times in the source
code) will be problematic for pretty much any similarity analysis.
Why? Because you just have a lot of the same sequence, and to get a good
delta you want to find common "sequences of these sequences" (call them
supersequences) in order to find the biggest common chunk.
So the badly performing cases for any delta algorithm (and I do want to
point out that this has nothing what-so-ever to do with the particular one
that git uses) tends to be exactly the ones where you have lots and lots
of smaller chunks that match in two files, and that then makes it costlier
to find the *bigger* chunks that are build up of those smaller chunks.
And generally you tend to have two situations: you either (a) take *much*
longer to find the common areas (they are often quadratic or worse
algorithms) or (b) you decide to ignore chunks that are so common that
they don't really add any real information when it comes to finding truly
common chunks. Where that second choice generally means that you can miss
some cases where you *could* have found a good match for deltification.
In fact, usually you have a combination of the above two effects: certain
deltas may be more expensive to find but there is also a limit that kicks
in and means that you never spend *too* much time on finding them if the
pattern space is not amenable to it.
Would lots of spaces be such a pattern? I personally doubt it would really
matter. In general, source code is easy to delta: the bulk of any common
sequences in most files will be found by the trivial "look for common
sequences in the beginning and the end". The really *bad* cases tend to be
rather odd, and often generated files.
So no, I don't think deltification is a huge deal for spaces. But it does
boil down to the same kind of issues: if you blow up the source base by
20%, you often slow down things by 20% or more, simply because there is
more data to process at all stages. It simply just slows down everything -
totally unnecessarily.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2007-10-17 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linus Torvalds
Cc: Geert Bosch, David Symonds, Wincent Colaiuta, Johan Herland, git,
Marius Storm-Olsen, Christian Couder, Ren? Scharfe, Junio Hamano
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0710171553580.26902@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Hi,
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> > Geert Bosch <bosch@adacore.com> writes:
> >
> > > On Oct 15, 2007, at 13:53, David Symonds wrote:
> > >> That's also why I suggested "skip"; you might not be able to test a
> > >> particular commit, but you might also not *want* to test a
> > >> particular commit for some reason.
> > >
> > > Skip seems a great choice: it directly expresses the wish to not
> > > consider a certain commit. The reason is unimportant.
> >
> > But it is an _action_, while "good" and "bad" are properties.
>
> Well, this has been debated to death, but I actually think that "skip"
> is a good choice, exactly because it's an action.
Could we, _please_, first decide if the implementation has merits, and
just apply it as is in that case? We can rename it whatever anybody likes
later, and we can paint the bikeshed brown if you want to.
Ciao,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2007-10-17 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christer Weinigel; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071018011734.7b636141@localhost.localdomain>
Hi,
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:11:37 +0100 (BST)
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.w@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
> >
> > > I think you would get at lot less argument if you weren't so damn
> > > self righteous about it.
> >
> > Why is it that in this thread, people whom I have heard _nothing_ of
> > before seem to think this would be a good time to let their opinion
> > be heard? Now, _that_ is what I call righteous. Show nothing but
> > opinion.
>
> I'm not that invisible am I?
>
> cd linux-2.6.22.7
> find . -type f | xargs egrep -il "weinigel" | wc -l
> 17
File or directory not found.
We are not Linux specific here. Besides, I was talking about _git_ source
code, just in case I did not make myself clear.
> [...] and privately I use CVS just because I started using CVS ten years
> ago and haven't bothered to change.
I wonder why you have to leave your hideout and comment on the source code
of _git_, then. I mean, why do _you_ care? (It should have become
apparent to you that _we_ care, so it looks even more like you wanted to
dictate a policy on git, which you have no business with.)
Puzzled, and a little unnerved,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [QGIT4 PATCH] Add --no-color option to several calls to git
From: Marco Costalba @ 2007-10-17 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yaacov Akiba Slama; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <1192643649-18908-1-git-send-email-ya@slamail.org>
On 10/17/07, Yaacov Akiba Slama <ya@slamail.org> wrote:
> Setting "diff.color = true" in the configuration makes
> the output of several git commands use color codes.
> The color codes aren't parsed by qgit, so adds the --no-color" option
> to the calls of these git commmands.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yaacov Akiba Slama <ya@slamail.org>
> ---
Thanks for the patch I will apply probably this week-end.
Probably a point release both for qgit-2.0 and qgit-1.5.7 will be
needed. This is a new feature of git that could break current qgit.
Could you please confirm me that with this patch qgit works flawless
for you when "diff.color = true", I' m worried to push a new point
release just to discover we need to fix some more.
Thanks
Marco
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Jari Aalto @ 2007-10-17 23:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <47168E70.4070305@op5.se>
* Thu 2007-10-18 Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> gmane.comp.version-control.git
* Message-Id: 47168E70.4070305@op5.se
> And simply because nearly all (unix) editors still insert a hard tab
> when pressing the tab key, and *mixing* tabs and spaces makes the
> situation *really* unbearable, one really shouldn't use all spaces.
There was no assumption about a particular OS or editors.
The QA tools will take care of warning or making automatic formatting
before the code is put to SCM. In projects you cannot assume anything
about people, their tools or what OS they might use at hand.
>> There is no such problem with spaces.
>>
>
> I beg to differ, for reasons stated multiple times elsewhere in this
> thread.
Consider:
- Any editor will display the text written in "all spaces"
100 % the same. Regradless of any viewer or editor used.
But the same is not true with text that uses tabs (because you
really can't know what options the editor is preset / user set /
regarding the treatment of tabs).
The score is 1 - 0 for "all spaces" in this contest.
--
Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno
From: Christian Couder @ 2007-10-17 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Shawn O. Pearce, Junio Hamano, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710171906280.25221@racer.site>
Hi,
Le mercredi 17 octobre 2007, Johannes Schindelin a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> wrote:
> > > Here is my bisect dunno patch series again.
> > > The changes since last time are the following:
> >
> > I now have this series queued in my pu branch. It passes the tests
> > it comes with, and doesn't appear to break anything, but apparently
> > there is also still some debate about what a dunno should be called
> > ("unknown", "void", "ugly", "dunno", "skip" ...).
>
> AFAICT these are all bikeshed painting arguments, not technical
> arguments. I was initially opposed to having --bisect-all, wanting to
> have
> --bisect-dunno <ref>...
>
> But in the end, the people doing the work decide, and therefore I am fine
> with --bisect-all, especially since it seems clean enough for me.
>
> As for all those "dunno is no English"... I'd first merge the technical
> part (i.e. what you have now in pu), and then let the discussion about
> which synonyms to choose continue, until a consensus is formed about
> other names (if there is a consensus at all!).
>
> IMHO there is no reason to hold of the fine work of Christian,
It's also the fine work of Junio as he wrote most of
the "rev-list --bisect-all" patch.
> just
> because there are non-technical arguments still in the air.
>
> I want bisect dunno. Even if there is another name later.
Thanks for your kind words,
Christian.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: How to Import a bitkeeper repo into git - Had a few questions on Qgit; I like the GUI.
From: Marco Costalba @ 2007-10-17 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robin Rosenberg
Cc: pete, piet.delaney, Linus Torvalds, VMiklos, free cycle, git,
piet.delaney, Piet Delaney
In-Reply-To: <200710171800.37345.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com>
On 10/17/07, Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> wrote:
>
> You could avoid the temporary files if you just pipe the diff to kompare. That
> would require an option to tell qgit that the external viewer can read a git diff.
>
> At the time qgit 1.5 was written, kompare could not handle git diffs.
>
So does the other tools I have checked at that time.
But I don't know if this fixes the problem of slowness reported. A
little test Pete may do is just as I have written in the former email:
try to save the big files that cause troubles where he prefers and run
Kompare on them directly from the command line.
Is kompare faster? If no probably the 'pipe' technique will not solve
the problem and shrinks the applicability of the external diff
launcher to tools that handle diffs directly.
Marco
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Christer Weinigel @ 2007-10-17 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710172310270.25221@racer.site>
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 23:11:37 +0100 (BST)
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.w@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
> > I think you would get at lot less argument if you weren't so damn
> > self righteous about it.
>
> Why is it that in this thread, people whom I have heard _nothing_ of
> before seem to think this would be a good time to let their opinion
> be heard? Now, _that_ is what I call righteous. Show nothing but
> opinion.
I'm not that invisible am I?
cd linux-2.6.22.7
find . -type f | xargs egrep -il "weinigel" | wc -l
17
Ahh, confirmation, I really do exist. The earliest LSM entry I can find
for myself is from 1995:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/kernel/patches/scanners/hpscan-0.1.1.5.lsm
Mmm, nostalgia. :-)
But yes, I haven't contributed anything to git so far, I mostly lurk
on the mailing list and try to keep up with what's happening to git.
In the beginning I sent a few ideas to the list (which quite sadly were
ignored), but unfortunately I've been busy with paying work to do much
with git after that. And at work we use Perforce (yuk) or Subversion
(a lot nicer than Perforce) and privately I use CVS just because I
started using CVS ten years ago and haven't bothered to change. And
when I'm free I prefer to hack on hardware or device drivers instead.
The reason I wrote my first mail in this thread is that I work in a
different environment than Linus does and wanted to share that
experience. I usually work with embedded programming, where people use
lots of different editors and in mixed environments. Some people use
Visual Studio on Windows because that's what they use for host
programming, a lot of embedded development is done in the (almost
invariably sucky) IDE that comes with the compilers for the embedded
CPU, such as Microchips MPLAB or IAR Workbench, Eclipse is becoming
quite popular for C development, Slickedit is also popular on Windows,
a colleague prefers nedit for some strange reason, and so on. In such a
heterogeneous environment the easiest way to make sure that people see
the same indentation in all editors is to just tell them to use spaces
for indentation, and I think that every editor I just mentioned has a
setting to do that automatically. Microemacs is the odd one out in
that it doesn't support it. And my employers haven't really been
paying me to go on a crusade for the holy TAB is 8 spaces cause, they
just want things done, so I've had to settle for a "good enough"
solution which works most of the time.
So I just thought it was unfair of Linus to say that "use spaces"
doesn't solve any problems, in some environments it does. For the
Linux kernel and Git, it's easier for the maintainer to enforce
the coding standards and since Linus and Junio prefer to use hard tabs,
that are the rules that people who want to play with their toys
have to adhere to.
BTW, how serious is the problem with deltifying when there are a lot of
spaces that David Kastrup mentioned? It does sound like a quite
serious problem if it has a big impact on the performance of Git. Git
isn't only used for the Linux kernel, so there has to be some projects
that both use spaces for indentation and use Git out there. Wouldn't
it be a problem when people put ASCII graphics in comments or just have
comments like /*********************************/ in their code?
/Christer
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] Bisect dunno
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2007-10-17 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Kastrup
Cc: Geert Bosch, David Symonds, Wincent Colaiuta, Johan Herland, git,
Marius Storm-Olsen, Christian Couder, Ren? Scharfe, Junio Hamano,
Johannes Schindelin
In-Reply-To: <85ve98gl57.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
> Geert Bosch <bosch@adacore.com> writes:
>
> > On Oct 15, 2007, at 13:53, David Symonds wrote:
> >> That's also why I suggested "skip"; you might not be able to test a
> >> particular commit, but you might also not *want* to test a particular
> >> commit for some reason.
> >
> > Skip seems a great choice: it directly expresses the wish to
> > not consider a certain commit. The reason is unimportant.
>
> But it is an _action_, while "good" and "bad" are properties.
Well, this has been debated to death, but I actually think that "skip" is
a good choice, exactly because it's an action.
"good" and "bad" do indeed describe properties of the commit, and are used
to describe the state of the tree in question. In contrast, "git bisect
skip" says not somethign about the state of that tree - it talks about
what we should *do* with that tree.
IOW, I think "git bisect skip" in some sense has more to do with an action
like "git bisect start", than with "good" or "bad".
(Yes, "good" and "bad" have an action associated with them too - namely to
start the next bisection event - but they are not named according to the
action they cause, but because they describe the tree state)
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] Bisect: fix a removed variable that is still used.
From: Christian Couder @ 2007-10-17 22:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio Hamano, Shawn O. Pearce, Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: git
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
---
git-bisect.sh | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
This is fix for something I forgot in the patch named:
[PATCH 6/7] Bisect: factorise "bisect_{bad,good,dunno}"
into "bisect_state".
I can send an updated version of the above patch if
needed.
diff --git a/git-bisect.sh b/git-bisect.sh
index b266d17..abae9a6 100755
--- a/git-bisect.sh
+++ b/git-bisect.sh
@@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ bisect_run () {
if [ $res -ne 0 ]; then
echo >&2 "bisect run failed:"
- echo >&2 "$next_bisect exited with error code $res"
+ echo >&2 "'bisect_state $state' exited with error code $res"
exit $res
fi
--
1.5.3.3.136.g591d1-dirty
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Andreas Ericsson @ 2007-10-17 22:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jari Aalto; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <k5pll7rb.fsf@blue.sea.net>
Jari Aalto wrote:
> * Wed 2007-10-17 Michael Witten <mfwitten@MIT.EDU>
> * Message-Id: E29971BA-7306-4570-8383-26D0C9C0B814@mit.edu
>> On 17 Oct 2007, at 3:17:08 AM, Luke Lu wrote:
>>
>>> But I still haven't seen any compelling arguments against the "all
>>> space" case
>> Overhead!
>>
>> If you use 8 spaces instead of one tab,
>> that's using up 7x more space!
>
> Software is the right place to worry about optimization. We should trust
> SCM to make proper and efficient deltas. If not, algorithms need
> improvemnts.
>
> Any cross platform development or electronic exchange is guaranteed to
> be interpreted correctly when policy enforces "only spaces"
>
> As we have already seen in numerous times in this thread, using tabs
> will - eventually - be interpreted in some editor, in some display, in
> some encironment using some tools ... incorrectly or different than the
> author intended. Simply because editors are configurable and we cannot
> know what settings they may have when they load the file in.
>
And simply because nearly all (unix) editors still insert a hard tab
when pressing the tab key, and *mixing* tabs and spaces makes the
situation *really* unbearable, one really shouldn't use all spaces.
It's code, not graphics. If it's really horrible, any editor can be
configured to change the non-default tab-setting back to 8 if that's
the problem. Mine's set to 4. Primarily because I think 8 is too
much. Sometimes (roughly once every 2 years), that gives me problem.
It's exclusively when someone has consciously mixed tabs and spaces.
Using either or *never* gives any problem.
> There is no such problem with spaces.
>
I beg to differ, for reasons stated multiple times elsewhere in this
thread.
> The storage constraints are insignificant given the disk space vs. cost;
Perhaps, but it's low-hanging fruit and since all spaces have its issues
too, why not just go with tabs?
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH] fixing output of non-fast-forward output of post-receive-email
From: Robert Schiele @ 2007-10-17 22:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git; +Cc: gitster, andyparkins
post-receive-email has one place where the variable fast_forward is not
spelled correctly. At the same place the logic was reversed. The
combination of both bugs made the script work correctly for fast-forward
commits but not for non-fast-forward ones. This change fixes this to
be correct in both cases.
Signed-off-by: Robert Schiele <rschiele@gmail.com>
---
contrib/hooks/post-receive-email | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/hooks/post-receive-email b/contrib/hooks/post-receive-email
index cbbd02f..28a06c7 100644
--- a/contrib/hooks/post-receive-email
+++ b/contrib/hooks/post-receive-email
@@ -323,7 +323,7 @@ generate_update_branch_email()
echo " via $rev ($revtype)"
done
- if [ -z "$fastforward" ]; then
+ if [ "$fast_forward" ]; then
echo " from $oldrev ($oldrev_type)"
else
# 1. Existing revisions were removed. In this case newrev is a
--
1.5.2.4
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2007-10-17 22:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christer Weinigel; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071017232146.4b9e4097@localhost.localdomain>
Hi,
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
> I think you would get at lot less argument if you weren't so damn self
> righteous about it.
Why is it that in this thread, people whom I have heard _nothing_ of
before seem to think this would be a good time to let their opinion be
heard? Now, _that_ is what I call righteous. Show nothing but opinion.
Ciao,
Dscho
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2007-10-17 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christer Weinigel; +Cc: Tom Tobin, git
In-Reply-To: <20071017232146.4b9e4097@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
> But when you start claiming that there are no reasons to use all
> spaces, and that it doesn't solve any problems (it definitely does),
> and that all editors work with hard tabs at 8 (which they don't), at
> least I get a bit frustrated with you. It's very non-respectful of you
> to claim that everyone is stupid that doesn't agree with you and is
> just asking for silly arguments. Yes, I know, you're an opinionated
> bastard and proud of it, but maybe you should tone that down a bit.
Hey, fair enough.
I'm not very tolerant of people who haven't actually done anything, and
then come in and say things should be done certain ways. The fact is, code
talks, bullshit walks.
And bullshit should most definitely not be encouraged. People like that
should be discouraged *immediately*. I'm not interested in bikeshed
painters, I think they should be told so forcefully enough that they
either shut up or go away.
Maybe it's a character flaw. I'll respect people who do something
interesting, but re-implementing CVS (and badly, at that) or talking about
syntactic changes to other peoples projects is not going to fill me with
respect.
In short, I'll give respect when somebody is shown to be *worth* that
respect. But respect really has to be earned, not just "assumed",
otherwise it's pointless.
Linus
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: On Tabs and Spaces
From: Jari Aalto @ 2007-10-17 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
In-Reply-To: <E29971BA-7306-4570-8383-26D0C9C0B814@mit.edu>
* Wed 2007-10-17 Michael Witten <mfwitten@MIT.EDU>
* Message-Id: E29971BA-7306-4570-8383-26D0C9C0B814@mit.edu
> On 17 Oct 2007, at 3:17:08 AM, Luke Lu wrote:
>
>> But I still haven't seen any compelling arguments against the "all
>> space" case
>
> Overhead!
>
> If you use 8 spaces instead of one tab,
> that's using up 7x more space!
Software is the right place to worry about optimization. We should trust
SCM to make proper and efficient deltas. If not, algorithms need
improvemnts.
Any cross platform development or electronic exchange is guaranteed to
be interpreted correctly when policy enforces "only spaces"
As we have already seen in numerous times in this thread, using tabs
will - eventually - be interpreted in some editor, in some display, in
some encironment using some tools ... incorrectly or different than the
author intended. Simply because editors are configurable and we cannot
know what settings they may have when they load the file in.
There is no such problem with spaces.
The storage constraints are insignificant given the disk space vs. cost;
including possibly used compression algorithms in storage or transfers.
Jari
--
Welcome to FOSS revolution: we fix and modify until it shines
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox