On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 2:21 PM Derrick Stolee <stolee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 3/8/2021 7:09 PM, Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget wrote:> @@ -1127,9 +1137,10 @@ void diffcore_rename_extended(struct diff_options *options,
> > /*
> > * Cull sources:
> > * - remove ones corresponding to exact renames
> > + * - remove ones not found in relevant_sources
> > */
> > trace2_region_enter("diff", "cull after exact", options->repo);
> > - remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies);
> > + remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies, relevant_sources);
> > trace2_region_leave("diff", "cull after exact", options->repo);
>
> In this case, we are checking for copies. Perhaps there is a reason
> why we want to include relevant_sources in that case, so I'll look
> for it later.
There is no current caller making use of this. I could have just
marked the two options as incompatible and passed NULL here for
relevant sources, but...I didn't see a compelling reason to. If some
caller wanted copy detection and were only interested in copies from a
subset of sources, they could take advantage of relevant_sources in
the same way to limit to those paths that are relevant. I guess it
comes down to whether you view this as designing the code for future
theoretical cases, or explicitly taking steps to limit future
possibilities. I don't have a strong opinion here, but tried to
enable other future uses since diffcore-rename.c is used by many other
callers too.
> > } else {
> > /* Determine minimum score to match basenames */
> > @@ -1148,7 +1159,7 @@ void diffcore_rename_extended(struct diff_options *options,
> > * - remove ones involved in renames (found via exact match)
> > */
> > trace2_region_enter("diff", "cull after exact", options->repo);
> > - remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies);
> > + remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies, NULL);
> > trace2_region_leave("diff", "cull after exact", options->repo);
> >
> > /* Preparation for basename-driven matching. */
> > @@ -1167,9 +1178,10 @@ void diffcore_rename_extended(struct diff_options *options,
> > /*
> > * Cull sources, again:
> > * - remove ones involved in renames (found via basenames)
> > + * - remove ones not found in relevant_sources
> > */
> > trace2_region_enter("diff", "cull basename", options->repo);
> > - remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies);
> > + remove_unneeded_paths_from_src(want_copies, relevant_sources);
> > trace2_region_leave("diff", "cull basename", options->repo);
>
> This seems backwards from your cover letter. You are using the exact renames
> _and_ basename matches to remove the unneeded paths. Why are we not stripping
> out the relevant_sources in the call further up, before we call
> find_basename_matches()?
Yeah, good flag. I should add a comment to the commit message about
how these are still needed in initialize_dir_rename_info() for
basename-guided directory rename detection...and will also play a role
in some of the special cases where renames are needed for more than
three-way content merges. And add a comment about how by the end of
the series, relevant_sources will be passed to find_basename_matches()
so that it can skip over those paths.
