On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 03:05:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Dropping it entirely, as below, doesn't break any tests. Junio, do you > > know of a case this is meant to improve? > > I think the only conceivable case is that in the middle of a single > block of text in an ancient version, another block of lines gets > inserted during the evolution of the file, but in the end these > intermediate edits all go away and the same original text remains. > > In such a case, without coalescing, we would not treat the original > single block of text as a single unit. Yeah, that makes sense, and it should be possible to construct a case based on that. > IIRC, blame has some threshold that makes too small a block not > subject to move and copy detection, and it is most likely to avoid > fragmenting the blocks too small. I don't know if that would matter here, though. This coalescing is taking place after all of the blaming has happened, and is just preparing the final output. -Peff
