On Tuesday 12 April 2011, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I still feel that a file with 1000 rearranged lines should somehow > > count "more" than a file with only 1 rearranged line,... > > I think that is just entirely a different mode of operation. I do not > think it is wrong to have an alternative implementation of the dirstat > damage counter that is based on numstat code. > > It may end up counting the damage slower than the current code, and more > importantly it will count a different kind of damage than the current > code does, so we may probably want to make it an optional feature. I wrote it up just for fun, and here's the patch. I'll leave it up to you to decide if it's worth it. First, though, I've got another patch to --dirstat, which - in the case of renames, attributes the damage to the target filename instead of the source filename. I found this more intuitive, especially in the case of copies (-C -C) where damage would be attributed to the directory containing the (unchanged) source file, instead of the directory containing the (changed) target file. Have fun! :) ...Johan -- Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> www.herland.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html