Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] blame: add the ability to ignore commits

> My main concerns:
> - Can your version reach outside of a diff chunk?

Currently no. It's optimised for reformatting and renaming, both of
which preserve ordering. I could look into allowing disordered matches
where the similarity is high, while still being biased towards ordered
matches. If you can post more examples that would be helpful.

> - Complexity and possibly performance.  The recursive stuff made me
> wonder about it a bit.  It's no reason not to use it, just need to check
> it more closely.

Complexity I can't deny, I can only mitigate it with
documentation/comments. I optimised the code pretty heavily and tested
on some contrived worst-case scenarios and the performance was still
good so I'm not worried about that.

> Is the latest version of your stuff still the one you posted last week
> or so?

Yes. But reaching outside the chunk might lead to a significantly
different API in the next version...

> Similarly, do you think the "two pass" approach I have (check the chunk,
> then check the parent file) would work with your recursive partitioning
> style?  That might make yours able to handle the "split diff chunk" case.

Yes, should do. I'll see what I can come up with this week.

> No algorithm will work for all cases.  The one you just gave had the
> simple heuristic working better than a complex one.  We could make it
> more complex, but then another example may be worse.  I can live with
> some inaccuracy in exchange for simplicity.

Exactly, no algorithm will work for all cases. So what I'm suggesting
is that it might be best to let the user choose which heuristic is
appropriate for a given commit. If they know that the simple heuristic
works best then perhaps we should let them choose that rather than
only offering a one-size-fits-all option. But if we do want to go for
one-size-fits-all then I'm very keen to make sure it at least solves
the specific cases that we know about.