Re: [PATCH 0/3] Teach Git about the patience diff algorithm
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Jan 7, 2009, 17:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0901071610290.7496@intel-tinevez-2-302>
- In-Reply-To
- <20090107143926.GB831@artemis.corp>
Hi,
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 07:40:02PM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Although I would like to see it in once it is fleshed out -- even if > > it does not meet our usefulness standard -- because people said Git is > > inferior for not providing a patience diff. If we have --patience, we > > can say "but we have it, it's just not useful, check for yourself". > > Well I believe it's useful, but maybe the standard algorithm could be > tweaked the way Linus proposes to make the "long" lines weight louder or > so.
I think this "weighting idea" is a bit too much of handwaving to start anything close to a design; as I pointed out, anything that has something different than a 1 for a deleted/added line affects performance negatively.
> WRT the leaks, you want to squash the attached patch on the proper > patches of your series (maybe the xdl_free on map.entries could be put > in a hasmap_destroy or similar btw, but valgrind reports no more leaks > in xdiff now).
Thanks!
I also squashed in a patch that avoids calling xdl_cleanup_records() and then memset()ing the rchg array to 0 (which worked around the segmentation fault).
Patch 1/3 v3 follows, Dscho