Re: [PATCH/RFC] blame: accept multiple -L ranges

From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Date: Jul 9, 2013, 18:23 UTC
Message-ID: <CAPig+cT9U7L-03Fe5YLft=WS2EZY1B_BhLzkM_sT_3wQQ1g1MQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87ehb7d3za.fsf@hexa.v.cablecom.net>

On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>>  (2) In the ranges "-L <anything>,/B/ -L /C/,<anything>", the
>>      beginning of the second range is found by choosing C that comes
>>      _after_ the end of the previous range (/B/ may choose either
>>      the second or the 4th line, and the only C that comes after
>>      either of them is the 5th line and that is where the second
>>      range should begin, not at the beginning of the file).  The
>>      same for "-L 1,3 -L /C/" (only C that comes after 3 is eligible
>>      to be the beginning of the second range).
>
> So passing several -L arguments does not blame the union of what each
> argument would blame individually?  Doesn't that make it rather harder
> to explain?

I don't think Junio meant to imply that. Collecting the blame ranges can/should be a distinct step from coalescing them. Junio is saying that an -L /re/ range search should start after the maximum line number already specified by any preceding range. Once all input ranges are collected, they can be coalesced. (If a -L /re/ range happens to be coalesced with or into some other range, that's fine: you're still seeing blame output for the requested lines.)

-- ES