Re: [PATCH v8 00/10] commit-reach: terminate merge-base walk when one side is exhausted
Kristofer Karlsson <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.git |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAL71e4NMdOeL0Mwngpw9qn=sSctFEVMPiYEiWQ=LT+Ct-mP02Q@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 at 08:23, Elijah Newren <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am quite pleased with how this series has turned out. Not only does > it provide nice speedups, I think the structure of the series is > particularly nicely set up in a way that helps guide the discovery of > the idea behind the optimization for others to read, documents and > tests everything logically and thoroughly, and was a pleasant read. > > I brought up several issues in previous versions, and this round > addresses them all. That's very much appreciated, I know this has been a lot of content to review and there has been some unfortunate churn, especially around the textual sections. > > +For v1, `paint_down_to_common()` falls back to pure commit-date > > -+ordering via `compare_commits_by_commit_date`. Because commit > > ++ordering via `compare_commits_by_commit_date`. Because commit > > +dates are not monotonic (clock skew, rebases, etc.), the queue > > +may visit commits out of topological order. > > Don't think for a second that I didn't notice you murdering these > double spaces. You villain! ;-) Yes, well spotted -- this was unfortunate but needed I think. I realized that this document was inconsistent, so I decided to standardize on single spaces because that was the smaller change and it also aligned with other technical documents (such as commit-graph.adoc) ... > > 3: f857577e0c ! 3: 6208bcf3b3 t6600: add test cases for side-exhaustion edge cases > > ...and now you're just toying with us. :-) ... and here I just restored your tests to their original glory, despite making the patch series as a whole feel a bit inconsistent. Overall though, I wonder if it would be useful to codify a preference for double or single spacing after periods, even if that (obviously) does not imply we should reformat the entire code-base directly. > Okay, my last two range-diff comments were just jokes, but more > serious now: I think you did a nice job on the re-splitting. Thanks > for doing that! Thank you, writing documentation feels harder (for me) than coding, but I'm somewhat happy with the end state now :) - Kristofer