From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:53:18 GMT
Subject: Re: diff --stat
Message-ID: <20120214215318.GA24802@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vty2t5bmw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:49:11PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

>  static int scale_linear(int it, int width, int max_change)
>  {
> +	if (!it)
> +		return 0;
>  	/*
> -	 * make sure that at least one '-' is printed if there were deletions,
> -	 * and likewise for '+'.
> +	 * make sure that at least one '-' or '+' is printed if
> +	 * there is any change to this path. The easiest way is to
> +	 * scale linearly as if all the quantities were one smaller
> +	 * than they actually are, and then add one to the result.
>  	 */
>  	if (max_change < 2)
> -		return it;
> -	return ((it - 1) * (width - 1) + max_change - 1) / (max_change - 1);
> +		return 1;
> +	return 1 + ((it - 1) * (width - 1) / (max_change - 1));

I'm not sure I understand why the "it - 1" and "max_change - 1" bits are
still there, or what they are doing in the first place. I.e., why is it
not simply "scale linearly to width-1, then add 1" as I posted earlier?

-Peff