Lars Hjemli wrote:
>In add_parents_to_list, if any parent of a revision had already been
>SEEN, the current code would continue with the next parent, skipping
>the test for --first-parent. This patch inverts the test for SEEN so
>that the test for --first-parent is always performed.
Let's put it this way:
- If there would have been only one path to any particular point in the
tree, then the --first-parent flag makes no differences, because the
tree wouldn't contain any merges to begin with.
- If a tree contains *any* merges (i.e. a commit with multiple parents),
then there are always multiple paths to some common ancestor, and
therefore depending on which path you travel up first, you sometimes get
clashes with the SEEN flag (unpredictable by definition).
- It would seem logical and sufficient to avoid this unpredictability by
utilising the --first-parent flag to present and walk a tree of commits
AS IF there were no merges.
- My original patch did just that, it simplified the code to make sure
that all other parents beside the first parent are ignored when
walking the tree.
- Your code now doesn't simplify the (IMO) convoluted walk, and still
marks things as seen, even though in the first-parent case, these
commits are not really seen at all. It implies that your code
generates differing output, depending on the merges present.
- The question now is, do we want the output of --first-parent to be
immutable with respect to merges being present (but hidden from sight
during a --first-parent run), or do we want the output of
--first-parent to actually change depending on variations in parents
other than the first parent?
I'd say it's better to keep the code simpler, and to make sure the
output does *not* depend on any parents other than the first (as
implemented in my original patch).
>This is a slightly different approach which I think is less ugly.
Your patch is smaller, and therefore (perhaps) less ugly; the resulting
code and logic of my original patch is simpler (IMHO), and therefore
cleaner (but it all depends on (the lack of) consensus over the points above).
--
Sincerely, srb@xxxxxxx
Stephen R. van den Berg.
"If I had to live my life again, I'd make the same mistakes, only sooner."
--
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
