On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 01:24:56AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 25 2019, Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > > > Hi Ævar, > > > > Thanks for the amazingly fast reply and for the useful feature (yay!). > > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 05:37:10PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 24 2019, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> > >> > Add the ability for the -G<regex> pickaxe to search only through added > >> > or removed lines in the diff, or even through an arbitrary amount of > >> > context lines when combined with -U<n>. > >> > > >> > This has been requested[1][2] a few times in the past, and isn't > >> > currently possible. Instead users need to do -G<regex> and then write > >> > their own post-parsing script to see if the <regex> matched added or > >> > removed lines, or both. There was no way to match the adjacent context > >> > lines other than running and grepping the equivalent of a "log -p -U<n>". > >> > > >> > 1. https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqwoqrr8y2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > >> > 2. https://public-inbox.org/git/20190424102609.GA19697@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > >> > >> I see now once I actually read Eugeniu Rosca's E-Mail upthread instead > >> of just knee-jerk sending out patches that this doesn't actually solve > >> his particular problem fully. > >> > >> I.e. if you want some AND/OR matching support this --pickaxe-raw-diff > >> won't give you that, but it *does* make it much easier to script up such > >> an option. Run it twice with -G"\+<regex>" and -G"-<regex>", "sort | > >> uniq -c" the commit list, and see which things occur once or twice. > >> > >> Of course that doesn't give you more complex nested and/or cases, but if > >> git-log grew support for that like git-grep has the -G option could use > >> that, although at that point we'd probably want to spend effort on > >> making the underlying machinery smarter to avoid duplicate work. > > > > Purely from user's standpoint, I feel more comfortable with `git grep` > > and `git log --grep` particularly b/c they support '--all-match' [2], > > allowing more flexible multi-line searches. Based on your feedback, it > > looks to me that `git log -G/-S` did not have a chance to develop their > > features to the same level. > > > >> > >> Furthermore, and quoting Eugeniu upthread: > >> > >> In the context of [1], I would like to find all Linux commits which > >> replaced: > >> 'devm_request_threaded_irq(* IRQF_SHARED *)' > >> by: > >> 'devm_request_threaded_irq(* IRQF_ONESHOT *)' > >> > >> Such AND/OR machinery would give you what you wanted *most* of the time, > >> but it would also find removed/added pairs that were "unrelated" as well > >> as "related". Solving *that* problem is more complex, but something the > >> diff machinery could in principle expose. > > > > I expect some false positives, since git is agnostic on the language > > used to write the versioned files (the latter sounds like a research > > topic to me - I hope there is somebody willing to experiment with that > > in future). > > I was thinking of something where the added/removed could be filtered to > cases that occur in the same diff hunk. > > >> > >> But the "-G<regex> --pickaxe-raw-diff" feature I have as-is is very > >> useful, > > > > I agree. I am a bit bothered by the fact that > > `git log --oneline -Ux -G<regex> --pickaxe-raw-diff` outputs the > > contents/patch of a commit. My expectation is that we have the > > `log -p` knob for that? > > This is unrelated to --pickaxe-raw-diff, -U<n> just implies -p in > general. See e.g. "git log -U1". Oops. Since I use `-U<n>` mostly with `git show`, I missed the implication. You are right. Then, my question is how users are going to (quote from commit description): > >> > [..] search [..] through an arbitrary amount of > >> > context lines when combined with -U<n>. and achieve a `git log --oneline` report, given that -U<n> unfolds the commits? FTR, based on my quick experiments, --pickaxe-raw-diff does process several lines of context by default (it appears to default to -U3). > > >> I've had at least two people off-list ask me about a problem > >> that would be solved by it just in the last 1/2 year (unrelated to them > >> having seen the WIP patch I sent last October). > >> > >> It's more general than Junio's suggested --pickaxe-ignore-{add,del} > > > > As a user, I would be happier to freely grep in the raw commit contents > > rather than learning a dozen of new options which provide small subsets > > of the same functionality. So, I personally vote for the approach taken > > by --pickaxe-raw-diff. This would also reduce the complexity of my > > current git aliases and/or allow dropping some of them altogether. > > > > Quite off topic, but I also needed to come up with a solution to get > > the C functions modified/touched by a git commit [3]. It is my > > understanding that --pickaxe-raw-diff can't help here and I still have > > to rely on parsing the output of `git log -p`? > > Yeah, it doesn't help with that. When it runs we haven't generated the > context line or the "@@" line yet, that's later. You can breakpoint on > xdl_format_hunk_hdr and diffgrep_consume to see it in action. > > It's a waste of CPU to generate that for all possible hunks, most of > which we won't show at all. > > But it's of course possible to do so by running the full diff machinery > over every commit and matching on the result, the current pickaxe is > just taking shortcuts and not doing that. > > >> options[1], but those could be implemented in terms of this underlying > >> code if anyone cared to have those as aliases. You'd just take the > >> -G<regex> and prefix the <regex> with "^\+" or "^-" as appropriate and > >> turn on the DIFF_PICKAXE_G_RAW_DIFF flag. > >> > >> 1. https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqwoqrr8y2.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > Thanks! > > > > [2] https://gitster.livejournal.com/30195.html > > [3] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50707171/how-to-get-all-c-functions-modified-by-a-git-commit
