On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c
>> index 9038f19..e1d82c9 100644
>> --- a/diff.c
>> +++ b/diff.c
>> @@ -1177,7 +1177,16 @@ static char *pprint_rename(const char *a, const char *b)
>> - while (a <= old && b <= new && *old == *new) {
>> + /*
>> + * Note:
>> + * if pfx_length is 0, old/new will never reach a - 1 because it
>> + * would mean the whole string is common suffix. But then, the
>> + * whole string would also be a common prefix, and we would not
>> + * have pfx_length equals 0.
>> + */
>> + while (a + pfx_length - 1 <= old &&
>> + b + pfx_length - 1 <= new &&
>> + *old == *new) {
>
> Umm, you still have the broken version here, and the previous patch is
> already in next. I think you should decide for one thing ;-)
Thanks ! I had not paid enough attention to that.
> Either: consider this a reroll; Junio would have to revert the version
> already in next (which isn't _so_ bad, because next will eventually be
> rebuilt) and apply this new version. But if you do that, you should
> squash my change that deals with the underrun issue (I'd be fine with
> that).
I would not have done that without your consent (that's why I kept the
buggy version)
> Or: consider it an incremental improvement on the series, in which case
> you should send only the tests with a new commit message.
That seems like the best solution to me. I will resend later with just
the tests and a new commit message.
Cheers,
Antoine
--
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