On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> @@ -458,11 +458,11 @@ int xdl_change_compact(xdfile_t *xdf, xdfile_t *xdfo, long flags) {
>>> * the group.
>>> */
>>> while (ixs > 0 && xdl_hash_and_recmatch(recs, ixs - 1, ix - 1, flags)) {
>>> + emptylines += is_emptyline(recs[ix - 1]->ptr);
>>> +
>>> rchg[--ixs] = 1;
>>> rchg[--ix] = 0;
>>>
>>> - has_emptyline |=
>>> - starts_with_emptyline(recs[ix]->ptr);
>>
>> How is this fixing the segfault bug?
>> From my understanding ix should have the same value here as ix-1 above.
>>
>>> /*
>>> * This change might have joined two change groups,
>>> * so we try to take this scenario in account by moving
>>> @@ -492,9 +492,6 @@ int xdl_change_compact(xdfile_t *xdf, xdfile_t *xdfo, long flags) {
>>> rchg[ixs++] = 0;
>>> rchg[ix++] = 1;
>>>
>>> - has_emptyline |=
>>> - starts_with_emptyline(recs[ix]->ptr);
>>> -
>>
>> Or would this fix the segfault bug?
>> I think we would need to have the check for empty lines
>> in both loops to be sure to cover the whole movable range.
>
> Actually we would only need to have the empty line count in the second loop as
> the first loop shifted it as much up(backwards) as possible, such that
> the hunk sits on one
> end of the movable range. The second loop would iterate over the whole
> range, so that
> would be the only place needed to count.
I agree that we can drop the first part and I am testing it now.
Thanks,
Jake
--
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