Re: [RFC PATCH v5] Implement --first-parent for git rev-list --bisect

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 6, 2018, 21:43 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqfu0whwgo.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1807062123280.75@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

>> And I also do not see a reason why somebody wants to make the dist
>> computation to be 1-based (iow, changing the minimum from 0 to 1) or
>> one step not to be 1 (iow, giving 11 to e1 and e8), so while I agree
>> it is not strictly necessary to cast the concrete distance value in
>> stone, I do not see much harm doing so *if* it helps to make it
>> simpler the test that is necessary to make sure relative dist values
>> assigned to these commits are in correct order.
>
> I guess that you still want to misunderstand me.

Not at all.

> So in this case, quite obviously what you want to do is to verify that E
> and F get larger dist than e1 and e8. So that is what you test for. Not
> some fixed text that might require adjusting in the future for any other
> reason than a real bug.

The most important part of the above quote is "*if* it helps..." part, and I do think the downside of insisting on dist being exactly 0 for E and F is acceptable than having to write the "E and F must get the same dist value, and e1 and e8 must get the same dist value that is larger than the value that E and F gets, ..." test without doing so *and* still keep the resulting test readable. It is a tradeoff and we are drawing the line differently (I am being more practical here than insisting on requiring absolute minimum and nothing more).