From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C1E20248 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 09:48:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726549AbfDHJsg (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2019 05:48:36 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-f194.google.com ([209.85.222.194]:42575 "EHLO mail-qk1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726431AbfDHJsg (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2019 05:48:36 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f194.google.com with SMTP id b74so7520389qkg.9 for ; Mon, 08 Apr 2019 02:48:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=platin-gs.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=O4rGtKn/T8kBq2dLpEwFaTycxJudsDf1qoSvHrYqV0E=; b=oWXlFmNBx+zS6I5wXUxtMw6YnWa75Err5OZK/UPrSB5oabqSLnrQ0XCQ45HLUBweld EHC1gdyBcKt0GeoSz9CGP8Q+2dXJlV9g6tAekdeH3kkYdJuoN6YZFhwexT6/JRYWSs80 6TCvicHPpitiDwV02I+D/mARhgxQPwK4BXt9T4J6zrrzb1/f248ue8R33aE9q4l4j0X7 ilDnoF3HSUwUxe8tKwRjaEzyPIOXFcWricMfXku2gRHa5jQE5YO0pFL6JKppNsf64lio N+jhW71BRYnMQ04YzYIIxMJDOG5eeZEfTxU2ffWFgE9yX+vKc5EHa+gZufOVhbNmQTyH kQrw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=O4rGtKn/T8kBq2dLpEwFaTycxJudsDf1qoSvHrYqV0E=; b=XoJvP08A/jCxwlg39o8fpYC0+blcDpVqsU/Bl+v61pnZUUyJEXeYLbx8jRcz6dz9Ji DX2h/kqj/63gx3EA55XrHFI8lcBG7enqn2BGonHMbm9YQOXAF4Q1gXbh0XV50y3RN5Xp TPv9nghO7IoqIXclq2Mvb4Lvwq1/NQrH9gL946GwXgf237sMY67U58qL9L+YWLxodObt 2Xbs49aIfWkRKRTBb03ONTuBHnDoJCmO8QaKCYN1Z4yJhrGzhpjcB+iGYFUXIs3L7Bht 6EE4j/KaFC7kfwzM7kpTSgIS6dO3DBdm/YkmwMBopvIMv3qqMadYvKBMBRALI9son+tL q0GA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUVN7Wi/e93IgEO4zSPN5feVtl9Igr81VYjOS67AmOmdVEAqzZi vvP75oaCuHEMMOP1r3uPmh1J1Ov1/34ZCxL0+f0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzUJo3Y29RDXi9TC5x1crWI2bkwKIm2OD2p7r4j7BRKgLek52fYlR/hjh24Z9/DR2OlCb9anNGRZf+YPZ0xBGk= X-Received: by 2002:ae9:eb0b:: with SMTP id b11mr21597917qkg.214.1554716915193; Mon, 08 Apr 2019 02:48:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190407214635.12984-1-michael@platin.gs> <8736mtqy9n.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <8736mtqy9n.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> From: Michael Platings Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 11:48:23 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6] RFC blame: use a fingerprint heuristic to match ignored lines To: David Kastrup Cc: Git mailing list , Jeff King , Stefan Beller , Jeff Smith , Junio C Hamano , =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9_Scharfe?= , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , Johannes Schindelin , Barret Rhoden Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi David, You also get an out-of-memory error with the patch Barret posted at the start of this thread. I'm sorry you interpreted my message as declaring it somebody else's problem, that definitely wasn't my intent. I merely ran out of time to investigate further and I figure Barret is going to be interested in this issue and would prefer that I let him know sooner rather than later. -Michael (resending in plain text, sorry for the spam again) On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 23:52, David Kastrup wrote: > > michael@platin.gs writes: > > > From: Michael Platings > > > > Hi Barret, > > This is the updated fuzzy matching algorithm, sorry for the delay. It does > > highlight a bug in the calculation for the number of lines ("int nr_parent_lines > > = e->num_lines - delta;") - if you apply the patch, build it, then try to > > ./git blame --ignore-rev blame.c then you'll get a segfault > > because nr_parent_lines is a negative number. I haven't had time to investigate further > > but I have confirmed that the bug is not due to my patch. > > If you segfault with the patch and don't segfault with the patch, there > is not much of a point in declaring this "somebody else's problem", is > there? It has to be fixed anyway in order to make the patch get in. > > Or am I fundamentally misunderstanding something here? > > -- > David Kastrup