Re: The criss-cross merge case
- From
David Roundy <droundy@abridgegame.org>
- Date
- Apr 28, 2005, 11:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20050428111647.GB9422@abridgegame.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.21.0504272209390.30848-100000@iabervon.org>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 10:19:17PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Benedikt Schmidt wrote: > > Ok, darcs doesn't handle block moves, so there is no need for an > > algorithm that supports them (yet). Is there any free SCM that has > > support for block moves at the moment? It seems like clearcase detects > > them, but I don't know whqere it takes advantage of it. > > I would think that darcs would be able to do neat things in its merger if > it knew about block moves. Obviously, it only makes sense to add support > for identifying them and using them at the same time.
Indeed, handling block moves would definitely be *very* nice. An ancient version of darcs actually did this (it's not in the current darcs history, since it was so ancient and buggy), although it had a terrible diff algorithm. But I really didn't understand the theory back then, and when I rewrote everything, I never added the block moves back in. They complicate conflict situations a bit, and once I found that darcs was actually useable, I started focusing on other issues. (Most recently efficiency issues.)
-- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net