Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] automatically skip away from broken commits
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 9, 2009, 10:02 UTC
- Message-ID
- <m3prdd4t6s.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
- In-Reply-To
- <c07716ae0906082124n4a5bfe88md80ba8076c928b76@mail.gmail.com>
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 24 quoted lines
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Junio C Hamano<gitster@pobox.com> wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes: >> >>> The advantage of that -- and I have to admit I don't know if it will >>> ever matter in practice -- is that using an actual PRNG: >>> >>> a) is less likely to get into pathological capture behaviors. >>> b) doesn't make people think later that there is something magic to the >>> arbitrary chosen numbers. >> >> My gut feeling agrees with you that both are likely to be true; these are >> good points. >> >> Christian, what do you think? > > Here are some reasons why I think my algorithm might be better: > > - using HPA's formula I get on average 0.86 bits of information at > each step when alternating (against 0.72 when using a PRNG) > - I think that if the branches in the graph merge often between each > other, then on a big scale it's like when you are on the linear case > - I don't think we should try too hard to avoid pathological capture > behaviors, because I think we can't avoid them anyway in some cases, > like if the first bad commit is near many untestable commits
By the way, I have asked question about best algorithm for "bisect skip" on StackOverflow[1], but didn't get (yet) any good responses...
[1]: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/959324/
-- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git