From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 843AB1F404 for ; Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:15:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751671AbeDINPn (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:15:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f53.google.com ([74.125.83.53]:41802 "EHLO mail-pg0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751455AbeDINPm (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:15:42 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id e2so239596pgv.8 for ; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:15:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=ZHPLFjBzclCw5E+LQnNl5ANw1DbD8QMZ898YTjLsqvM=; b=b6J5oHN0yB6R2PxKEsZvyTi8dPKSNz9MwIM2yaIGyO1TDUmis9SbiK0KCrByvdlm3p F0RZEPozuk9OQYqIqEiaDKZDqZ813Xxz6yBdiDM6eVaWsgHE4080fsCXTQ2P1B7Tw7Qt FVmaoYMLQe30q+4MJ6/qi95TziYSheVTbhPQn/u0EOVKJgqzgkyz9fG3Akpnuo7A8iei kN1copIMukR4WnRQtV4H6/a+76WAqHply4ap1BA29nV+O7fW7CRFny769IvLHEkyLCLe +S5Dgabv9jtUI6pnyne85W5JWXTC+9icASguJkP94ZKBNoSvVXUVzho2urhM58nSUWow MC8g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=ZHPLFjBzclCw5E+LQnNl5ANw1DbD8QMZ898YTjLsqvM=; b=jA0m1eQnYT0umYb0i1CjpiiKlxDa753+X4km/kRQNcz4bO3wc4vQgDiiJwNzaIfknO K0Cfi0RXfCSZLJ/+oYc6/t9OMuGUJ2jhgxWCIMFa49jn4qNB6VJDuxL7E4oBz3mE1gAZ CgpU1hvjrStWKsyzUFfa9gsTth05Y9i2adaJkM1kdvPRiiXzmavWo+woS9sc0c6238Oc QLB9C8VYhryGVVb6iBnPxJRs+CMA2mSMaqiNB1EnKnSbj+5xJ7L823vYBE9y9eBt6Ewo KCtV1Le75gZUNrtMnvHbhJMobFe8pNLiW7vkuoONlptK3aWHFDEnJwlX5L7RNYqHPKB0 4gQA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBOaKxbSCyelgqrftPc2OKFH/hCxIcfa7TEqhJRxuvQcjsBOP6c VWjSj/0mSeXzr2ztmXnh5Fw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+IQXe1FdRjQ5AUQUsci8IzwdXyifHWZeGsM0hvm874nUnsxgC/uInMX3js11TTZl6vlMLqJQ== X-Received: by 10.167.128.2 with SMTP id j2mr5990701pfi.126.1523279741564; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:15:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:4898:6808:13e:c4e6:7a22:56f1:df04? ([2001:4898:8010:0:ae1c:7a22:56f1:df04]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f19sm659188pgv.39.2018.04.09.06.15.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:15:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Lazy-load trees when reading commit-graph To: Junio C Hamano , Jeff King Cc: Derrick Stolee , "git@vger.kernel.org" , "sbeller@google.com" , "avarab@gmail.com" , "larsxschneider@gmail.com" References: <20180403120057.173849-1-dstolee@microsoft.com> <20180406190919.167092-1-dstolee@microsoft.com> <20180406192146.GC921@sigill.intra.peff.net> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: <7930c9bf-4f24-2e76-b522-331a2e9ed5d5@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:15:33 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 4/8/2018 7:18 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> If I were doing it myself, I probably would have folded patches 1 and 3 >> together. They are touching all the same spots, and it would be an error >> for any case converted in patch 1 to not get converted in patch 3. I'm >> assuming you caught them all due to Coccinelle, though IMHO it is >> somewhat overkill here. By folding them together the compiler could tell >> you which spots you missed. > Yeah, that approach would probably be a more sensible way to assure > the safety/correctness of the result to readers better. I don't understand how folding the patches makes the correctness clearer, since the rename (1/4) is checked by the compiler and the Coccinelle script (3/4) only works after that rename is complete. The only thing I can imagine is that it makes smaller patch emails, since there is only one large patch instead of two. In this case, I prefer to make changes that are easier to check by automation (compiler and coccinelle). However, I will defer to the experts in this regard. If a v3 is necessary, then I will fold the commits together. Thanks, -Stolee