From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xdiff: implement empty line chunk heuristic Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 14:02:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20160502180231.GA8812@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160420041827.GA7627@sigill.intra.peff.net> <1461969582.731.1.camel@intel.com> <1461970113.731.3.camel@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Keller, Jacob E" , "sbeller@google.com" , "git@vger.kernel.org" , "jacob.keller@gmail.com" To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 02 20:02:39 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1axIB4-0001pK-Of for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 02 May 2016 20:02:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754376AbcEBSCg (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2016 14:02:36 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:60419 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753818AbcEBSCe (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2016 14:02:34 -0400 Received: (qmail 6551 invoked by uid 102); 2 May 2016 18:02:34 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 02 May 2016 14:02:34 -0400 Received: (qmail 16860 invoked by uid 107); 2 May 2016 18:02:45 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Mon, 02 May 2016 14:02:45 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 02 May 2016 14:02:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 10:40:28AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Keller, Jacob E" writes: > > > True. I think the chances that it needs such a thing are quite minor, > > and if an undocumented knob gets exposed it would have to become > > documented and maintained, so I'd prefer to avoid it. Given that the > > risk is pretty small I think that's ok. > > OK, then let's do only the "documentation" part. > > -- >8 -- > Subject: [PATCH] diff: undocument the compaction heuristic knobs for experimentation > > It seems that people around here are all happy with the updated > heuristics used to decide where the hunks are separated. Let's keep > that as the default. Even though we do not expect too much trouble > from the difference between the old and the new algorithms, just in > case let's leave the implementation of the knobs to turn it off for > emergencies. There is no longer need for documenting them, though. I agree with this reasoning. Thanks. -Peff