Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] merge-recursive: fix assumption that head tree being merged is HEAD
- Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 09:15:06 -0700
- From: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/7] merge-recursive: fix assumption that head tree being merged is HEAD
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 12:14 AM, Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 8:19 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>> `git merge-recursive` does a three-way merge between user-specified trees
>>> base, head, and remote. Since the user is allowed to specify head, we can
>>> not necesarily assume that head == HEAD.
>>> We modify index_has_changes() to take an extra argument specifying the
>>> tree to compare the index to. If NULL, it will compare to HEAD. We then
>>> use this from merge-recursive to make sure we compare to the
>>> user-specified head.
>>> Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> I'm really unsure where the index_has_changes() declaration should go;
>>> I stuck it in tree.h, but is there a better spot?
>> I think I saw you tried to lift an assumption that we're always
>> working on the_index in a separate patch recently. Should that
>> logic apply also to this part of the codebase? IOW, shouldn't
>> index_has_changes() take a pointer to istate (as opposed to a
>> function that uses the implicit the_index that should be named as
>> "cache_has_changes()" or something?)
>> I tend to think this function as part of the larger read-cache.c
>> family whose definitions are in cache.h and accompanied by macros
>> that are protected by NO_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS so if we
>> were to move it elsewhere, I'd keep the header part as-is and
>> implementation to read-cache.c to keep it together with the family,
>> but I do not see a huge issue with the current placement, either.
> That's good point; the goal to lift assumptions on the_index should
> probably also apply here. I'll make the change.
> (And it was actually Duy's patch that I was reviewing, but close
> enough.) I'll take a look at moving it to read-cache.c as well.
Making it not depend on the_index will require changes to make
diff-lib.c not depend on the_index first, so this is going to have to
wait for Duy's changes mentioned at
I'll re-roll this series on top of Duy's when it comes out.