git-commit-vandalism/xdiff/xdiffi.c

1044 lines
27 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
/*
* LibXDiff by Davide Libenzi ( File Differential Library )
* Copyright (C) 2003 Davide Libenzi
*
* This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
* modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
* License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
* version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
*
* This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
* but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
* MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
* Lesser General Public License for more details.
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
* License along with this library; if not, see
* <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
*
* Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
*
*/
#include "xinclude.h"
#define XDL_MAX_COST_MIN 256
#define XDL_HEUR_MIN_COST 256
#define XDL_LINE_MAX (long)((1UL << (CHAR_BIT * sizeof(long) - 1)) - 1)
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
#define XDL_SNAKE_CNT 20
#define XDL_K_HEUR 4
typedef struct s_xdpsplit {
long i1, i2;
int min_lo, min_hi;
} xdpsplit_t;
/*
* See "An O(ND) Difference Algorithm and its Variations", by Eugene Myers.
* Basically considers a "box" (off1, off2, lim1, lim2) and scan from both
* the forward diagonal starting from (off1, off2) and the backward diagonal
* starting from (lim1, lim2). If the K values on the same diagonal crosses
* returns the furthest point of reach. We might end up having to expensive
* cases using this algorithm is full, so a little bit of heuristic is needed
* to cut the search and to return a suboptimal point.
*/
static long xdl_split(unsigned long const *ha1, long off1, long lim1,
unsigned long const *ha2, long off2, long lim2,
long *kvdf, long *kvdb, int need_min, xdpsplit_t *spl,
xdalgoenv_t *xenv) {
long dmin = off1 - lim2, dmax = lim1 - off2;
long fmid = off1 - off2, bmid = lim1 - lim2;
long odd = (fmid - bmid) & 1;
long fmin = fmid, fmax = fmid;
long bmin = bmid, bmax = bmid;
long ec, d, i1, i2, prev1, best, dd, v, k;
/*
* Set initial diagonal values for both forward and backward path.
*/
kvdf[fmid] = off1;
kvdb[bmid] = lim1;
for (ec = 1;; ec++) {
int got_snake = 0;
/*
* We need to extent the diagonal "domain" by one. If the next
* values exits the box boundaries we need to change it in the
* opposite direction because (max - min) must be a power of two.
* Also we initialize the external K value to -1 so that we can
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
* avoid extra conditions check inside the core loop.
*/
if (fmin > dmin)
kvdf[--fmin - 1] = -1;
else
++fmin;
if (fmax < dmax)
kvdf[++fmax + 1] = -1;
else
--fmax;
for (d = fmax; d >= fmin; d -= 2) {
if (kvdf[d - 1] >= kvdf[d + 1])
i1 = kvdf[d - 1] + 1;
else
i1 = kvdf[d + 1];
prev1 = i1;
i2 = i1 - d;
for (; i1 < lim1 && i2 < lim2 && ha1[i1] == ha2[i2]; i1++, i2++);
if (i1 - prev1 > xenv->snake_cnt)
got_snake = 1;
kvdf[d] = i1;
if (odd && bmin <= d && d <= bmax && kvdb[d] <= i1) {
spl->i1 = i1;
spl->i2 = i2;
spl->min_lo = spl->min_hi = 1;
return ec;
}
}
/*
* We need to extent the diagonal "domain" by one. If the next
* values exits the box boundaries we need to change it in the
* opposite direction because (max - min) must be a power of two.
* Also we initialize the external K value to -1 so that we can
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
* avoid extra conditions check inside the core loop.
*/
if (bmin > dmin)
kvdb[--bmin - 1] = XDL_LINE_MAX;
else
++bmin;
if (bmax < dmax)
kvdb[++bmax + 1] = XDL_LINE_MAX;
else
--bmax;
for (d = bmax; d >= bmin; d -= 2) {
if (kvdb[d - 1] < kvdb[d + 1])
i1 = kvdb[d - 1];
else
i1 = kvdb[d + 1] - 1;
prev1 = i1;
i2 = i1 - d;
for (; i1 > off1 && i2 > off2 && ha1[i1 - 1] == ha2[i2 - 1]; i1--, i2--);
if (prev1 - i1 > xenv->snake_cnt)
got_snake = 1;
kvdb[d] = i1;
if (!odd && fmin <= d && d <= fmax && i1 <= kvdf[d]) {
spl->i1 = i1;
spl->i2 = i2;
spl->min_lo = spl->min_hi = 1;
return ec;
}
}
if (need_min)
continue;
/*
* If the edit cost is above the heuristic trigger and if
* we got a good snake, we sample current diagonals to see
* if some of the, have reached an "interesting" path. Our
* measure is a function of the distance from the diagonal
* corner (i1 + i2) penalized with the distance from the
* mid diagonal itself. If this value is above the current
* edit cost times a magic factor (XDL_K_HEUR) we consider
* it interesting.
*/
if (got_snake && ec > xenv->heur_min) {
for (best = 0, d = fmax; d >= fmin; d -= 2) {
dd = d > fmid ? d - fmid: fmid - d;
i1 = kvdf[d];
i2 = i1 - d;
v = (i1 - off1) + (i2 - off2) - dd;
if (v > XDL_K_HEUR * ec && v > best &&
off1 + xenv->snake_cnt <= i1 && i1 < lim1 &&
off2 + xenv->snake_cnt <= i2 && i2 < lim2) {
for (k = 1; ha1[i1 - k] == ha2[i2 - k]; k++)
if (k == xenv->snake_cnt) {
best = v;
spl->i1 = i1;
spl->i2 = i2;
break;
}
}
}
if (best > 0) {
spl->min_lo = 1;
spl->min_hi = 0;
return ec;
}
for (best = 0, d = bmax; d >= bmin; d -= 2) {
dd = d > bmid ? d - bmid: bmid - d;
i1 = kvdb[d];
i2 = i1 - d;
v = (lim1 - i1) + (lim2 - i2) - dd;
if (v > XDL_K_HEUR * ec && v > best &&
off1 < i1 && i1 <= lim1 - xenv->snake_cnt &&
off2 < i2 && i2 <= lim2 - xenv->snake_cnt) {
for (k = 0; ha1[i1 + k] == ha2[i2 + k]; k++)
if (k == xenv->snake_cnt - 1) {
best = v;
spl->i1 = i1;
spl->i2 = i2;
break;
}
}
}
if (best > 0) {
spl->min_lo = 0;
spl->min_hi = 1;
return ec;
}
}
/*
* Enough is enough. We spent too much time here and now we collect
* the furthest reaching path using the (i1 + i2) measure.
*/
if (ec >= xenv->mxcost) {
long fbest, fbest1, bbest, bbest1;
fbest = fbest1 = -1;
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
for (d = fmax; d >= fmin; d -= 2) {
i1 = XDL_MIN(kvdf[d], lim1);
i2 = i1 - d;
if (lim2 < i2)
i1 = lim2 + d, i2 = lim2;
if (fbest < i1 + i2) {
fbest = i1 + i2;
fbest1 = i1;
}
}
bbest = bbest1 = XDL_LINE_MAX;
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
for (d = bmax; d >= bmin; d -= 2) {
i1 = XDL_MAX(off1, kvdb[d]);
i2 = i1 - d;
if (i2 < off2)
i1 = off2 + d, i2 = off2;
if (i1 + i2 < bbest) {
bbest = i1 + i2;
bbest1 = i1;
}
}
if ((lim1 + lim2) - bbest < fbest - (off1 + off2)) {
spl->i1 = fbest1;
spl->i2 = fbest - fbest1;
spl->min_lo = 1;
spl->min_hi = 0;
} else {
spl->i1 = bbest1;
spl->i2 = bbest - bbest1;
spl->min_lo = 0;
spl->min_hi = 1;
}
return ec;
}
}
}
/*
* Rule: "Divide et Impera". Recursively split the box in sub-boxes by calling
* the box splitting function. Note that the real job (marking changed lines)
* is done in the two boundary reaching checks.
*/
int xdl_recs_cmp(diffdata_t *dd1, long off1, long lim1,
diffdata_t *dd2, long off2, long lim2,
long *kvdf, long *kvdb, int need_min, xdalgoenv_t *xenv) {
unsigned long const *ha1 = dd1->ha, *ha2 = dd2->ha;
/*
* Shrink the box by walking through each diagonal snake (SW and NE).
*/
for (; off1 < lim1 && off2 < lim2 && ha1[off1] == ha2[off2]; off1++, off2++);
for (; off1 < lim1 && off2 < lim2 && ha1[lim1 - 1] == ha2[lim2 - 1]; lim1--, lim2--);
/*
* If one dimension is empty, then all records on the other one must
* be obviously changed.
*/
if (off1 == lim1) {
char *rchg2 = dd2->rchg;
long *rindex2 = dd2->rindex;
for (; off2 < lim2; off2++)
rchg2[rindex2[off2]] = 1;
} else if (off2 == lim2) {
char *rchg1 = dd1->rchg;
long *rindex1 = dd1->rindex;
for (; off1 < lim1; off1++)
rchg1[rindex1[off1]] = 1;
} else {
xdpsplit_t spl;
spl.i1 = spl.i2 = 0;
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
/*
* Divide ...
*/
if (xdl_split(ha1, off1, lim1, ha2, off2, lim2, kvdf, kvdb,
need_min, &spl, xenv) < 0) {
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
return -1;
}
/*
* ... et Impera.
*/
if (xdl_recs_cmp(dd1, off1, spl.i1, dd2, off2, spl.i2,
kvdf, kvdb, spl.min_lo, xenv) < 0 ||
xdl_recs_cmp(dd1, spl.i1, lim1, dd2, spl.i2, lim2,
kvdf, kvdb, spl.min_hi, xenv) < 0) {
return -1;
}
}
return 0;
}
int xdl_do_diff(mmfile_t *mf1, mmfile_t *mf2, xpparam_t const *xpp,
xdfenv_t *xe) {
long ndiags;
long *kvd, *kvdf, *kvdb;
xdalgoenv_t xenv;
diffdata_t dd1, dd2;
if (XDF_DIFF_ALG(xpp->flags) == XDF_PATIENCE_DIFF)
return xdl_do_patience_diff(mf1, mf2, xpp, xe);
if (XDF_DIFF_ALG(xpp->flags) == XDF_HISTOGRAM_DIFF)
return xdl_do_histogram_diff(mf1, mf2, xpp, xe);
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
if (xdl_prepare_env(mf1, mf2, xpp, xe) < 0) {
return -1;
}
/*
* Allocate and setup K vectors to be used by the differential algorithm.
* One is to store the forward path and one to store the backward path.
*/
ndiags = xe->xdf1.nreff + xe->xdf2.nreff + 3;
if (!(kvd = (long *) xdl_malloc((2 * ndiags + 2) * sizeof(long)))) {
xdl_free_env(xe);
return -1;
}
kvdf = kvd;
kvdb = kvdf + ndiags;
kvdf += xe->xdf2.nreff + 1;
kvdb += xe->xdf2.nreff + 1;
xenv.mxcost = xdl_bogosqrt(ndiags);
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
if (xenv.mxcost < XDL_MAX_COST_MIN)
xenv.mxcost = XDL_MAX_COST_MIN;
xenv.snake_cnt = XDL_SNAKE_CNT;
xenv.heur_min = XDL_HEUR_MIN_COST;
dd1.nrec = xe->xdf1.nreff;
dd1.ha = xe->xdf1.ha;
dd1.rchg = xe->xdf1.rchg;
dd1.rindex = xe->xdf1.rindex;
dd2.nrec = xe->xdf2.nreff;
dd2.ha = xe->xdf2.ha;
dd2.rchg = xe->xdf2.rchg;
dd2.rindex = xe->xdf2.rindex;
if (xdl_recs_cmp(&dd1, 0, dd1.nrec, &dd2, 0, dd2.nrec,
kvdf, kvdb, (xpp->flags & XDF_NEED_MINIMAL) != 0, &xenv) < 0) {
xdl_free(kvd);
xdl_free_env(xe);
return -1;
}
xdl_free(kvd);
return 0;
}
static xdchange_t *xdl_add_change(xdchange_t *xscr, long i1, long i2, long chg1, long chg2) {
xdchange_t *xch;
if (!(xch = (xdchange_t *) xdl_malloc(sizeof(xdchange_t))))
return NULL;
xch->next = xscr;
xch->i1 = i1;
xch->i2 = i2;
xch->chg1 = chg1;
xch->chg2 = chg2;
xch->ignore = 0;
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
return xch;
}
static int recs_match(xrecord_t *rec1, xrecord_t *rec2, long flags)
{
return (rec1->ha == rec2->ha &&
xdl_recmatch(rec1->ptr, rec1->size,
rec2->ptr, rec2->size,
flags));
}
diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs Some groups of added/deleted lines in diffs can be slid up or down, because lines at the edges of the group are not unique. Picking good shifts for such groups is not a matter of correctness but definitely has a big effect on aesthetics. For example, consider the following two diffs. The first is what standard Git emits: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { } if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} +if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { $smtp_server = $_; The following diff is equivalent, but is obviously preferable from an aesthetic point of view: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -230,6 +230,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { $initial_reply_to =~ s/(^\s+|\s+$)//g; } +if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { This patch teaches Git to pick better positions for such "diff sliders" using heuristics that take the positions of nearby blank lines and the indentation of nearby lines into account. The existing Git code basically always shifts such "sliders" as far down in the file as possible. The only exception is when the slider can be aligned with a group of changed lines in the other file, in which case Git favors depicting the change as one add+delete block rather than one add and a slightly offset delete block. This naive algorithm often yields ugly diffs. Commit d634d61ed6 improved the situation somewhat by preferring to position add/delete groups to make their last line a blank line, when that is possible. This heuristic does more good than harm, but (1) it can only help if there are blank lines in the right places, and (2) always picks the last blank line, even if there are others that might be better. The end result is that it makes perhaps 1/3 as many errors as the default Git algorithm, but that still leaves a lot of ugly diffs. This commit implements a new and much better heuristic for picking optimal "slider" positions using the following approach: First observe that each hypothetical positioning of a diff slider introduces two splits: one between the context lines preceding the group and the first added/deleted line, and the other between the last added/deleted line and the first line of context following it. It tries to find the positioning that creates the least bad splits. Splits are evaluated based only on the presence and locations of nearby blank lines, and the indentation of lines near the split. Basically, it prefers to introduce splits adjacent to blank lines, between lines that are indented less, and between lines with the same level of indentation. In more detail: 1. It measures the following characteristics of a proposed splitting position in a `struct split_measurement`: * the number of blank lines above the proposed split * whether the line directly after the split is blank * the number of blank lines following that line * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line above the split * the indentation of the line directly below the split * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line after that line 2. It combines the measured attributes using a bunch of empirically-optimized weighting factors to derive a `struct split_score` that measures the "badness" of splitting the text at that position. 3. It combines the `split_score` for the top and the bottom of the slider at each of its possible positions, and selects the position that has the best `split_score`. I determined the initial set of weighting factors by collecting a corpus of Git histories from 29 open-source software projects in various programming languages. I generated many diffs from this corpus, and determined the best positioning "by eye" for about 6600 diff sliders. I used about half of the repositories in the corpus (corresponding to about 2/3 of the sliders) as a training set, and optimized the weights against this corpus using a crude automated search of the parameter space to get the best agreement with the manually-determined values. Then I tested the resulting heuristic against the full corpus. The results are summarized in the following table, in column `indent-1`: | repository | count | Git 2.9.0 | compaction | compaction-fixed | indent-1 | indent-2 | | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | afnetworking | 109 | 89 (81.7%) | 37 (33.9%) | 37 (33.9%) | 2 (1.8%) | 2 (1.8%) | | alamofire | 30 | 18 (60.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 15 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | angular | 184 | 127 (69.0%) | 39 (21.2%) | 23 (12.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 5 (2.7%) | | animate | 313 | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | | ant | 380 | 356 (93.7%) | 152 (40.0%) | 148 (38.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | * | bugzilla | 306 | 263 (85.9%) | 109 (35.6%) | 99 (32.4%) | 14 (4.6%) | 15 (4.9%) | * | corefx | 126 | 91 (72.2%) | 22 (17.5%) | 21 (16.7%) | 6 (4.8%) | 6 (4.8%) | | couchdb | 78 | 44 (56.4%) | 26 (33.3%) | 28 (35.9%) | 6 (7.7%) | 6 (7.7%) | * | cpython | 937 | 158 (16.9%) | 50 (5.3%) | 49 (5.2%) | 5 (0.5%) | 5 (0.5%) | * | discourse | 160 | 95 (59.4%) | 42 (26.2%) | 36 (22.5%) | 18 (11.2%) | 13 (8.1%) | | docker | 307 | 194 (63.2%) | 198 (64.5%) | 253 (82.4%) | 8 (2.6%) | 8 (2.6%) | * | electron | 163 | 132 (81.0%) | 38 (23.3%) | 39 (23.9%) | 6 (3.7%) | 6 (3.7%) | | git | 536 | 470 (87.7%) | 73 (13.6%) | 78 (14.6%) | 16 (3.0%) | 16 (3.0%) | * | gitflow | 127 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | ionic | 133 | 89 (66.9%) | 29 (21.8%) | 38 (28.6%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | | ipython | 482 | 362 (75.1%) | 167 (34.6%) | 169 (35.1%) | 11 (2.3%) | 11 (2.3%) | * | junit | 161 | 147 (91.3%) | 67 (41.6%) | 66 (41.0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 1 (0.6%) | * | lighttable | 15 | 5 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | magit | 88 | 75 (85.2%) | 11 (12.5%) | 9 (10.2%) | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | | neural-style | 28 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | nodejs | 781 | 649 (83.1%) | 118 (15.1%) | 111 (14.2%) | 4 (0.5%) | 5 (0.6%) | * | phpmyadmin | 491 | 481 (98.0%) | 75 (15.3%) | 48 (9.8%) | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | * | react-native | 168 | 130 (77.4%) | 79 (47.0%) | 81 (48.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | rust | 171 | 128 (74.9%) | 30 (17.5%) | 27 (15.8%) | 16 (9.4%) | 14 (8.2%) | | spark | 186 | 149 (80.1%) | 52 (28.0%) | 52 (28.0%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | | tensorflow | 115 | 66 (57.4%) | 48 (41.7%) | 48 (41.7%) | 5 (4.3%) | 5 (4.3%) | | test-more | 19 | 15 (78.9%) | 2 (10.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | 1 (5.3%) | 1 (5.3%) | * | test-unit | 51 | 34 (66.7%) | 14 (27.5%) | 8 (15.7%) | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (3.9%) | * | xmonad | 23 | 22 (95.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (4.3%) | * | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | totals | 6668 | 4391 (65.9%) | 1496 (22.4%) | 1491 (22.4%) | 150 (2.2%) | 144 (2.2%) | | totals (training set) | 4552 | 3195 (70.2%) | 1053 (23.1%) | 1061 (23.3%) | 86 (1.9%) | 88 (1.9%) | | totals (test set) | 2116 | 1196 (56.5%) | 443 (20.9%) | 430 (20.3%) | 64 (3.0%) | 56 (2.6%) | In this table, the numbers are the count and percentage of human-rated sliders that the corresponding algorithm got *wrong*. The columns are * "repository" - the name of the repository used. I used the diffs between successive non-merge commits on the HEAD branch of the corresponding repository. * "count" - the number of sliders that were human-rated. I chose most, but not all, sliders to rate from those among which the various algorithms gave different answers. * "Git 2.9.0" - the default algorithm used by `git diff` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction-fixed" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` after the fixes from earlier in this patch series. Note that the results are not dramatically different than those for "compaction". Both produce non-ideal diffs only about 1/3 as often as the default `git diff`. * "indent-1" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the first set of weighting factors, determined as described above. * "indent-2" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the final set of weighting factors, determined as described below. * `*` - indicates that repo was part of training set used to determine the first set of weighting factors. The fact that the heuristic performed nearly as well on the test set as on the training set in column "indent-1" is a good indication that the heuristic was not over-trained. Given that fact, I ran a second round of optimization, using the entire corpus as the training set. The resulting set of weights gave the results in column "indent-2". These are the weights included in this patch. The final result gives consistently and significantly better results across the whole corpus than either `git diff` or `git diff --compaction-heuristic`. It makes only about 1/30 as many errors as the former and about 1/10 as many errors as the latter. (And a good fraction of the remaining errors are for diffs that involve weirdly-formatted code, sometimes apparently machine-generated.) The tools that were used to do this optimization and analysis, along with the human-generated data values, are recorded in a separate project [1]. This patch adds a new command-line option `--indent-heuristic`, and a new configuration setting `diff.indentHeuristic`, that activate this heuristic. This interface is only meant for testing purposes, and should be finalized before including this change in any release. [1] https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-09-05 11:44:51 +02:00
/*
* If a line is indented more than this, get_indent() just returns this value.
* This avoids having to do absurd amounts of work for data that are not
* human-readable text, and also ensures that the output of get_indent fits within
* an int.
*/
#define MAX_INDENT 200
/*
* Return the amount of indentation of the specified line, treating TAB as 8
* columns. Return -1 if line is empty or contains only whitespace. Clamp the
* output value at MAX_INDENT.
*/
static int get_indent(xrecord_t *rec)
{
long i;
int ret = 0;
for (i = 0; i < rec->size; i++) {
char c = rec->ptr[i];
if (!XDL_ISSPACE(c))
return ret;
else if (c == ' ')
ret += 1;
else if (c == '\t')
ret += 8 - ret % 8;
/* ignore other whitespace characters */
if (ret >= MAX_INDENT)
return MAX_INDENT;
}
/* The line contains only whitespace. */
return -1;
}
/*
* If more than this number of consecutive blank rows are found, just return this
* value. This avoids requiring O(N^2) work for pathological cases, and also
* ensures that the output of score_split fits in an int.
*/
#define MAX_BLANKS 20
/* Characteristics measured about a hypothetical split position. */
struct split_measurement {
/*
* Is the split at the end of the file (aside from any blank lines)?
*/
int end_of_file;
/*
* How much is the line immediately following the split indented (or -1 if
* the line is blank):
*/
int indent;
/*
* How many consecutive lines above the split are blank?
*/
int pre_blank;
/*
* How much is the nearest non-blank line above the split indented (or -1
* if there is no such line)?
*/
int pre_indent;
/*
* How many lines after the line following the split are blank?
*/
int post_blank;
/*
* How much is the nearest non-blank line after the line following the
* split indented (or -1 if there is no such line)?
*/
int post_indent;
};
struct split_score {
/* The effective indent of this split (smaller is preferred). */
int effective_indent;
/* Penalty for this split (smaller is preferred). */
int penalty;
};
/*
* Fill m with information about a hypothetical split of xdf above line split.
*/
static void measure_split(const xdfile_t *xdf, long split,
struct split_measurement *m)
{
long i;
if (split >= xdf->nrec) {
m->end_of_file = 1;
m->indent = -1;
} else {
m->end_of_file = 0;
m->indent = get_indent(xdf->recs[split]);
}
m->pre_blank = 0;
m->pre_indent = -1;
for (i = split - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
m->pre_indent = get_indent(xdf->recs[i]);
if (m->pre_indent != -1)
break;
m->pre_blank += 1;
if (m->pre_blank == MAX_BLANKS) {
m->pre_indent = 0;
break;
}
}
m->post_blank = 0;
m->post_indent = -1;
for (i = split + 1; i < xdf->nrec; i++) {
m->post_indent = get_indent(xdf->recs[i]);
if (m->post_indent != -1)
break;
m->post_blank += 1;
if (m->post_blank == MAX_BLANKS) {
m->post_indent = 0;
break;
}
}
}
/*
* The empirically-determined weight factors used by score_split() below.
* Larger values means that the position is a less favorable place to split.
*
* Note that scores are only ever compared against each other, so multiplying
* all of these weight/penalty values by the same factor wouldn't change the
* heuristic's behavior. Still, we need to set that arbitrary scale *somehow*.
* In practice, these numbers are chosen to be large enough that they can be
* adjusted relative to each other with sufficient precision despite using
* integer math.
*/
/* Penalty if there are no non-blank lines before the split */
#define START_OF_FILE_PENALTY 1
/* Penalty if there are no non-blank lines after the split */
#define END_OF_FILE_PENALTY 21
/* Multiplier for the number of blank lines around the split */
#define TOTAL_BLANK_WEIGHT (-30)
/* Multiplier for the number of blank lines after the split */
#define POST_BLANK_WEIGHT 6
/*
* Penalties applied if the line is indented more than its predecessor
*/
#define RELATIVE_INDENT_PENALTY (-4)
#define RELATIVE_INDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY 10
/*
* Penalties applied if the line is indented less than both its predecessor and
* its successor
*/
#define RELATIVE_OUTDENT_PENALTY 24
#define RELATIVE_OUTDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY 17
/*
* Penalties applied if the line is indented less than its predecessor but not
* less than its successor
*/
#define RELATIVE_DEDENT_PENALTY 23
#define RELATIVE_DEDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY 17
/*
* We only consider whether the sum of the effective indents for splits are
* less than (-1), equal to (0), or greater than (+1) each other. The resulting
* value is multiplied by the following weight and combined with the penalty to
* determine the better of two scores.
*/
#define INDENT_WEIGHT 60
/*
* How far do we slide a hunk at most?
*/
#define INDENT_HEURISTIC_MAX_SLIDING 100
diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs Some groups of added/deleted lines in diffs can be slid up or down, because lines at the edges of the group are not unique. Picking good shifts for such groups is not a matter of correctness but definitely has a big effect on aesthetics. For example, consider the following two diffs. The first is what standard Git emits: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { } if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} +if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { $smtp_server = $_; The following diff is equivalent, but is obviously preferable from an aesthetic point of view: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -230,6 +230,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { $initial_reply_to =~ s/(^\s+|\s+$)//g; } +if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { This patch teaches Git to pick better positions for such "diff sliders" using heuristics that take the positions of nearby blank lines and the indentation of nearby lines into account. The existing Git code basically always shifts such "sliders" as far down in the file as possible. The only exception is when the slider can be aligned with a group of changed lines in the other file, in which case Git favors depicting the change as one add+delete block rather than one add and a slightly offset delete block. This naive algorithm often yields ugly diffs. Commit d634d61ed6 improved the situation somewhat by preferring to position add/delete groups to make their last line a blank line, when that is possible. This heuristic does more good than harm, but (1) it can only help if there are blank lines in the right places, and (2) always picks the last blank line, even if there are others that might be better. The end result is that it makes perhaps 1/3 as many errors as the default Git algorithm, but that still leaves a lot of ugly diffs. This commit implements a new and much better heuristic for picking optimal "slider" positions using the following approach: First observe that each hypothetical positioning of a diff slider introduces two splits: one between the context lines preceding the group and the first added/deleted line, and the other between the last added/deleted line and the first line of context following it. It tries to find the positioning that creates the least bad splits. Splits are evaluated based only on the presence and locations of nearby blank lines, and the indentation of lines near the split. Basically, it prefers to introduce splits adjacent to blank lines, between lines that are indented less, and between lines with the same level of indentation. In more detail: 1. It measures the following characteristics of a proposed splitting position in a `struct split_measurement`: * the number of blank lines above the proposed split * whether the line directly after the split is blank * the number of blank lines following that line * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line above the split * the indentation of the line directly below the split * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line after that line 2. It combines the measured attributes using a bunch of empirically-optimized weighting factors to derive a `struct split_score` that measures the "badness" of splitting the text at that position. 3. It combines the `split_score` for the top and the bottom of the slider at each of its possible positions, and selects the position that has the best `split_score`. I determined the initial set of weighting factors by collecting a corpus of Git histories from 29 open-source software projects in various programming languages. I generated many diffs from this corpus, and determined the best positioning "by eye" for about 6600 diff sliders. I used about half of the repositories in the corpus (corresponding to about 2/3 of the sliders) as a training set, and optimized the weights against this corpus using a crude automated search of the parameter space to get the best agreement with the manually-determined values. Then I tested the resulting heuristic against the full corpus. The results are summarized in the following table, in column `indent-1`: | repository | count | Git 2.9.0 | compaction | compaction-fixed | indent-1 | indent-2 | | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | afnetworking | 109 | 89 (81.7%) | 37 (33.9%) | 37 (33.9%) | 2 (1.8%) | 2 (1.8%) | | alamofire | 30 | 18 (60.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 15 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | angular | 184 | 127 (69.0%) | 39 (21.2%) | 23 (12.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 5 (2.7%) | | animate | 313 | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | | ant | 380 | 356 (93.7%) | 152 (40.0%) | 148 (38.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | * | bugzilla | 306 | 263 (85.9%) | 109 (35.6%) | 99 (32.4%) | 14 (4.6%) | 15 (4.9%) | * | corefx | 126 | 91 (72.2%) | 22 (17.5%) | 21 (16.7%) | 6 (4.8%) | 6 (4.8%) | | couchdb | 78 | 44 (56.4%) | 26 (33.3%) | 28 (35.9%) | 6 (7.7%) | 6 (7.7%) | * | cpython | 937 | 158 (16.9%) | 50 (5.3%) | 49 (5.2%) | 5 (0.5%) | 5 (0.5%) | * | discourse | 160 | 95 (59.4%) | 42 (26.2%) | 36 (22.5%) | 18 (11.2%) | 13 (8.1%) | | docker | 307 | 194 (63.2%) | 198 (64.5%) | 253 (82.4%) | 8 (2.6%) | 8 (2.6%) | * | electron | 163 | 132 (81.0%) | 38 (23.3%) | 39 (23.9%) | 6 (3.7%) | 6 (3.7%) | | git | 536 | 470 (87.7%) | 73 (13.6%) | 78 (14.6%) | 16 (3.0%) | 16 (3.0%) | * | gitflow | 127 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | ionic | 133 | 89 (66.9%) | 29 (21.8%) | 38 (28.6%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | | ipython | 482 | 362 (75.1%) | 167 (34.6%) | 169 (35.1%) | 11 (2.3%) | 11 (2.3%) | * | junit | 161 | 147 (91.3%) | 67 (41.6%) | 66 (41.0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 1 (0.6%) | * | lighttable | 15 | 5 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | magit | 88 | 75 (85.2%) | 11 (12.5%) | 9 (10.2%) | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | | neural-style | 28 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | nodejs | 781 | 649 (83.1%) | 118 (15.1%) | 111 (14.2%) | 4 (0.5%) | 5 (0.6%) | * | phpmyadmin | 491 | 481 (98.0%) | 75 (15.3%) | 48 (9.8%) | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | * | react-native | 168 | 130 (77.4%) | 79 (47.0%) | 81 (48.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | rust | 171 | 128 (74.9%) | 30 (17.5%) | 27 (15.8%) | 16 (9.4%) | 14 (8.2%) | | spark | 186 | 149 (80.1%) | 52 (28.0%) | 52 (28.0%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | | tensorflow | 115 | 66 (57.4%) | 48 (41.7%) | 48 (41.7%) | 5 (4.3%) | 5 (4.3%) | | test-more | 19 | 15 (78.9%) | 2 (10.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | 1 (5.3%) | 1 (5.3%) | * | test-unit | 51 | 34 (66.7%) | 14 (27.5%) | 8 (15.7%) | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (3.9%) | * | xmonad | 23 | 22 (95.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (4.3%) | * | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | totals | 6668 | 4391 (65.9%) | 1496 (22.4%) | 1491 (22.4%) | 150 (2.2%) | 144 (2.2%) | | totals (training set) | 4552 | 3195 (70.2%) | 1053 (23.1%) | 1061 (23.3%) | 86 (1.9%) | 88 (1.9%) | | totals (test set) | 2116 | 1196 (56.5%) | 443 (20.9%) | 430 (20.3%) | 64 (3.0%) | 56 (2.6%) | In this table, the numbers are the count and percentage of human-rated sliders that the corresponding algorithm got *wrong*. The columns are * "repository" - the name of the repository used. I used the diffs between successive non-merge commits on the HEAD branch of the corresponding repository. * "count" - the number of sliders that were human-rated. I chose most, but not all, sliders to rate from those among which the various algorithms gave different answers. * "Git 2.9.0" - the default algorithm used by `git diff` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction-fixed" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` after the fixes from earlier in this patch series. Note that the results are not dramatically different than those for "compaction". Both produce non-ideal diffs only about 1/3 as often as the default `git diff`. * "indent-1" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the first set of weighting factors, determined as described above. * "indent-2" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the final set of weighting factors, determined as described below. * `*` - indicates that repo was part of training set used to determine the first set of weighting factors. The fact that the heuristic performed nearly as well on the test set as on the training set in column "indent-1" is a good indication that the heuristic was not over-trained. Given that fact, I ran a second round of optimization, using the entire corpus as the training set. The resulting set of weights gave the results in column "indent-2". These are the weights included in this patch. The final result gives consistently and significantly better results across the whole corpus than either `git diff` or `git diff --compaction-heuristic`. It makes only about 1/30 as many errors as the former and about 1/10 as many errors as the latter. (And a good fraction of the remaining errors are for diffs that involve weirdly-formatted code, sometimes apparently machine-generated.) The tools that were used to do this optimization and analysis, along with the human-generated data values, are recorded in a separate project [1]. This patch adds a new command-line option `--indent-heuristic`, and a new configuration setting `diff.indentHeuristic`, that activate this heuristic. This interface is only meant for testing purposes, and should be finalized before including this change in any release. [1] https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-09-05 11:44:51 +02:00
/*
* Compute a badness score for the hypothetical split whose measurements are
* stored in m. The weight factors were determined empirically using the tools and
* corpus described in
*
* https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools
*
* Also see that project if you want to improve the weights based on, for example,
* a larger or more diverse corpus.
*/
static void score_add_split(const struct split_measurement *m, struct split_score *s)
{
/*
* A place to accumulate penalty factors (positive makes this index more
* favored):
*/
int post_blank, total_blank, indent, any_blanks;
if (m->pre_indent == -1 && m->pre_blank == 0)
s->penalty += START_OF_FILE_PENALTY;
if (m->end_of_file)
s->penalty += END_OF_FILE_PENALTY;
/*
* Set post_blank to the number of blank lines following the split,
* including the line immediately after the split:
*/
post_blank = (m->indent == -1) ? 1 + m->post_blank : 0;
total_blank = m->pre_blank + post_blank;
/* Penalties based on nearby blank lines: */
s->penalty += TOTAL_BLANK_WEIGHT * total_blank;
s->penalty += POST_BLANK_WEIGHT * post_blank;
if (m->indent != -1)
indent = m->indent;
else
indent = m->post_indent;
any_blanks = (total_blank != 0);
/* Note that the effective indent is -1 at the end of the file: */
s->effective_indent += indent;
if (indent == -1) {
/* No additional adjustments needed. */
} else if (m->pre_indent == -1) {
/* No additional adjustments needed. */
} else if (indent > m->pre_indent) {
/*
* The line is indented more than its predecessor.
*/
s->penalty += any_blanks ?
RELATIVE_INDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY :
RELATIVE_INDENT_PENALTY;
} else if (indent == m->pre_indent) {
/*
* The line has the same indentation level as its predecessor.
* No additional adjustments needed.
*/
} else {
/*
* The line is indented less than its predecessor. It could be
* the block terminator of the previous block, but it could
* also be the start of a new block (e.g., an "else" block, or
* maybe the previous block didn't have a block terminator).
* Try to distinguish those cases based on what comes next:
*/
if (m->post_indent != -1 && m->post_indent > indent) {
/*
* The following line is indented more. So it is likely
* that this line is the start of a block.
*/
s->penalty += any_blanks ?
RELATIVE_OUTDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY :
RELATIVE_OUTDENT_PENALTY;
} else {
/*
* That was probably the end of a block.
*/
s->penalty += any_blanks ?
RELATIVE_DEDENT_WITH_BLANK_PENALTY :
RELATIVE_DEDENT_PENALTY;
}
}
}
static int score_cmp(struct split_score *s1, struct split_score *s2)
{
/* -1 if s1.effective_indent < s2->effective_indent, etc. */
int cmp_indents = ((s1->effective_indent > s2->effective_indent) -
(s1->effective_indent < s2->effective_indent));
return INDENT_WEIGHT * cmp_indents + (s1->penalty - s2->penalty);
}
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
/*
* Represent a group of changed lines in an xdfile_t (i.e., a contiguous group
* of lines that was inserted or deleted from the corresponding version of the
* file). We consider there to be such a group at the beginning of the file, at
* the end of the file, and between any two unchanged lines, though most such
* groups will usually be empty.
*
* If the first line in a group is equal to the line following the group, then
* the group can be slid down. Similarly, if the last line in a group is equal
* to the line preceding the group, then the group can be slid up. See
* group_slide_down() and group_slide_up().
*
* Note that loops that are testing for changed lines in xdf->rchg do not need
* index bounding since the array is prepared with a zero at position -1 and N.
*/
struct xdlgroup {
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
/*
* The index of the first changed line in the group, or the index of
* the unchanged line above which the (empty) group is located.
*/
long start;
/*
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
* The index of the first unchanged line after the group. For an empty
* group, end is equal to start.
*/
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
long end;
};
/*
* Initialize g to point at the first group in xdf.
*/
static void group_init(xdfile_t *xdf, struct xdlgroup *g)
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
{
g->start = g->end = 0;
while (xdf->rchg[g->end])
g->end++;
}
/*
* Move g to describe the next (possibly empty) group in xdf and return 0. If g
* is already at the end of the file, do nothing and return -1.
*/
static inline int group_next(xdfile_t *xdf, struct xdlgroup *g)
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
{
if (g->end == xdf->nrec)
return -1;
g->start = g->end + 1;
for (g->end = g->start; xdf->rchg[g->end]; g->end++)
;
return 0;
}
/*
* Move g to describe the previous (possibly empty) group in xdf and return 0.
* If g is already at the beginning of the file, do nothing and return -1.
*/
static inline int group_previous(xdfile_t *xdf, struct xdlgroup *g)
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
{
if (g->start == 0)
return -1;
g->end = g->start - 1;
for (g->start = g->end; xdf->rchg[g->start - 1]; g->start--)
;
return 0;
}
/*
* If g can be slid toward the end of the file, do so, and if it bumps into a
* following group, expand this group to include it. Return 0 on success or -1
* if g cannot be slid down.
*/
static int group_slide_down(xdfile_t *xdf, struct xdlgroup *g, long flags)
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
{
if (g->end < xdf->nrec &&
recs_match(xdf->recs[g->start], xdf->recs[g->end], flags)) {
xdf->rchg[g->start++] = 0;
xdf->rchg[g->end++] = 1;
while (xdf->rchg[g->end])
g->end++;
return 0;
} else {
return -1;
}
}
/*
* If g can be slid toward the beginning of the file, do so, and if it bumps
* into a previous group, expand this group to include it. Return 0 on success
* or -1 if g cannot be slid up.
*/
static int group_slide_up(xdfile_t *xdf, struct xdlgroup *g, long flags)
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
{
if (g->start > 0 &&
recs_match(xdf->recs[g->start - 1], xdf->recs[g->end - 1], flags)) {
xdf->rchg[--g->start] = 1;
xdf->rchg[--g->end] = 0;
while (xdf->rchg[g->start - 1])
g->start--;
return 0;
} else {
return -1;
}
}
static void xdl_bug(const char *msg)
{
fprintf(stderr, "BUG: %s\n", msg);
exit(1);
}
/*
* Move back and forward change groups for a consistent and pretty diff output.
* This also helps in finding joinable change groups and reducing the diff
* size.
*/
int xdl_change_compact(xdfile_t *xdf, xdfile_t *xdfo, long flags) {
struct xdlgroup g, go;
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
long earliest_end, end_matching_other;
long groupsize;
group_init(xdf, &g);
group_init(xdfo, &go);
while (1) {
/* If the group is empty in the to-be-compacted file, skip it: */
if (g.end == g.start)
goto next;
/*
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
* Now shift the change up and then down as far as possible in
* each direction. If it bumps into any other changes, merge them.
*/
do {
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
groupsize = g.end - g.start;
/*
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
* Keep track of the last "end" index that causes this
* group to align with a group of changed lines in the
* other file. -1 indicates that we haven't found such
* a match yet:
*/
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
end_matching_other = -1;
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
/* Shift the group backward as much as possible: */
while (!group_slide_up(xdf, &g, flags))
if (group_previous(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken sliding up");
/*
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
* This is this highest that this group can be shifted.
* Record its end index:
*/
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
earliest_end = g.end;
if (go.end > go.start)
end_matching_other = g.end;
/* Now shift the group forward as far as possible: */
while (1) {
if (group_slide_down(xdf, &g, flags))
break;
if (group_next(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken sliding down");
if (go.end > go.start)
end_matching_other = g.end;
}
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
} while (groupsize != g.end - g.start);
diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs Some groups of added/deleted lines in diffs can be slid up or down, because lines at the edges of the group are not unique. Picking good shifts for such groups is not a matter of correctness but definitely has a big effect on aesthetics. For example, consider the following two diffs. The first is what standard Git emits: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { } if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} +if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { $smtp_server = $_; The following diff is equivalent, but is obviously preferable from an aesthetic point of view: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -230,6 +230,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { $initial_reply_to =~ s/(^\s+|\s+$)//g; } +if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { This patch teaches Git to pick better positions for such "diff sliders" using heuristics that take the positions of nearby blank lines and the indentation of nearby lines into account. The existing Git code basically always shifts such "sliders" as far down in the file as possible. The only exception is when the slider can be aligned with a group of changed lines in the other file, in which case Git favors depicting the change as one add+delete block rather than one add and a slightly offset delete block. This naive algorithm often yields ugly diffs. Commit d634d61ed6 improved the situation somewhat by preferring to position add/delete groups to make their last line a blank line, when that is possible. This heuristic does more good than harm, but (1) it can only help if there are blank lines in the right places, and (2) always picks the last blank line, even if there are others that might be better. The end result is that it makes perhaps 1/3 as many errors as the default Git algorithm, but that still leaves a lot of ugly diffs. This commit implements a new and much better heuristic for picking optimal "slider" positions using the following approach: First observe that each hypothetical positioning of a diff slider introduces two splits: one between the context lines preceding the group and the first added/deleted line, and the other between the last added/deleted line and the first line of context following it. It tries to find the positioning that creates the least bad splits. Splits are evaluated based only on the presence and locations of nearby blank lines, and the indentation of lines near the split. Basically, it prefers to introduce splits adjacent to blank lines, between lines that are indented less, and between lines with the same level of indentation. In more detail: 1. It measures the following characteristics of a proposed splitting position in a `struct split_measurement`: * the number of blank lines above the proposed split * whether the line directly after the split is blank * the number of blank lines following that line * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line above the split * the indentation of the line directly below the split * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line after that line 2. It combines the measured attributes using a bunch of empirically-optimized weighting factors to derive a `struct split_score` that measures the "badness" of splitting the text at that position. 3. It combines the `split_score` for the top and the bottom of the slider at each of its possible positions, and selects the position that has the best `split_score`. I determined the initial set of weighting factors by collecting a corpus of Git histories from 29 open-source software projects in various programming languages. I generated many diffs from this corpus, and determined the best positioning "by eye" for about 6600 diff sliders. I used about half of the repositories in the corpus (corresponding to about 2/3 of the sliders) as a training set, and optimized the weights against this corpus using a crude automated search of the parameter space to get the best agreement with the manually-determined values. Then I tested the resulting heuristic against the full corpus. The results are summarized in the following table, in column `indent-1`: | repository | count | Git 2.9.0 | compaction | compaction-fixed | indent-1 | indent-2 | | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | afnetworking | 109 | 89 (81.7%) | 37 (33.9%) | 37 (33.9%) | 2 (1.8%) | 2 (1.8%) | | alamofire | 30 | 18 (60.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 15 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | angular | 184 | 127 (69.0%) | 39 (21.2%) | 23 (12.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 5 (2.7%) | | animate | 313 | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | | ant | 380 | 356 (93.7%) | 152 (40.0%) | 148 (38.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | * | bugzilla | 306 | 263 (85.9%) | 109 (35.6%) | 99 (32.4%) | 14 (4.6%) | 15 (4.9%) | * | corefx | 126 | 91 (72.2%) | 22 (17.5%) | 21 (16.7%) | 6 (4.8%) | 6 (4.8%) | | couchdb | 78 | 44 (56.4%) | 26 (33.3%) | 28 (35.9%) | 6 (7.7%) | 6 (7.7%) | * | cpython | 937 | 158 (16.9%) | 50 (5.3%) | 49 (5.2%) | 5 (0.5%) | 5 (0.5%) | * | discourse | 160 | 95 (59.4%) | 42 (26.2%) | 36 (22.5%) | 18 (11.2%) | 13 (8.1%) | | docker | 307 | 194 (63.2%) | 198 (64.5%) | 253 (82.4%) | 8 (2.6%) | 8 (2.6%) | * | electron | 163 | 132 (81.0%) | 38 (23.3%) | 39 (23.9%) | 6 (3.7%) | 6 (3.7%) | | git | 536 | 470 (87.7%) | 73 (13.6%) | 78 (14.6%) | 16 (3.0%) | 16 (3.0%) | * | gitflow | 127 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | ionic | 133 | 89 (66.9%) | 29 (21.8%) | 38 (28.6%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | | ipython | 482 | 362 (75.1%) | 167 (34.6%) | 169 (35.1%) | 11 (2.3%) | 11 (2.3%) | * | junit | 161 | 147 (91.3%) | 67 (41.6%) | 66 (41.0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 1 (0.6%) | * | lighttable | 15 | 5 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | magit | 88 | 75 (85.2%) | 11 (12.5%) | 9 (10.2%) | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | | neural-style | 28 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | nodejs | 781 | 649 (83.1%) | 118 (15.1%) | 111 (14.2%) | 4 (0.5%) | 5 (0.6%) | * | phpmyadmin | 491 | 481 (98.0%) | 75 (15.3%) | 48 (9.8%) | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | * | react-native | 168 | 130 (77.4%) | 79 (47.0%) | 81 (48.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | rust | 171 | 128 (74.9%) | 30 (17.5%) | 27 (15.8%) | 16 (9.4%) | 14 (8.2%) | | spark | 186 | 149 (80.1%) | 52 (28.0%) | 52 (28.0%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | | tensorflow | 115 | 66 (57.4%) | 48 (41.7%) | 48 (41.7%) | 5 (4.3%) | 5 (4.3%) | | test-more | 19 | 15 (78.9%) | 2 (10.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | 1 (5.3%) | 1 (5.3%) | * | test-unit | 51 | 34 (66.7%) | 14 (27.5%) | 8 (15.7%) | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (3.9%) | * | xmonad | 23 | 22 (95.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (4.3%) | * | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | totals | 6668 | 4391 (65.9%) | 1496 (22.4%) | 1491 (22.4%) | 150 (2.2%) | 144 (2.2%) | | totals (training set) | 4552 | 3195 (70.2%) | 1053 (23.1%) | 1061 (23.3%) | 86 (1.9%) | 88 (1.9%) | | totals (test set) | 2116 | 1196 (56.5%) | 443 (20.9%) | 430 (20.3%) | 64 (3.0%) | 56 (2.6%) | In this table, the numbers are the count and percentage of human-rated sliders that the corresponding algorithm got *wrong*. The columns are * "repository" - the name of the repository used. I used the diffs between successive non-merge commits on the HEAD branch of the corresponding repository. * "count" - the number of sliders that were human-rated. I chose most, but not all, sliders to rate from those among which the various algorithms gave different answers. * "Git 2.9.0" - the default algorithm used by `git diff` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction-fixed" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` after the fixes from earlier in this patch series. Note that the results are not dramatically different than those for "compaction". Both produce non-ideal diffs only about 1/3 as often as the default `git diff`. * "indent-1" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the first set of weighting factors, determined as described above. * "indent-2" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the final set of weighting factors, determined as described below. * `*` - indicates that repo was part of training set used to determine the first set of weighting factors. The fact that the heuristic performed nearly as well on the test set as on the training set in column "indent-1" is a good indication that the heuristic was not over-trained. Given that fact, I ran a second round of optimization, using the entire corpus as the training set. The resulting set of weights gave the results in column "indent-2". These are the weights included in this patch. The final result gives consistently and significantly better results across the whole corpus than either `git diff` or `git diff --compaction-heuristic`. It makes only about 1/30 as many errors as the former and about 1/10 as many errors as the latter. (And a good fraction of the remaining errors are for diffs that involve weirdly-formatted code, sometimes apparently machine-generated.) The tools that were used to do this optimization and analysis, along with the human-generated data values, are recorded in a separate project [1]. This patch adds a new command-line option `--indent-heuristic`, and a new configuration setting `diff.indentHeuristic`, that activate this heuristic. This interface is only meant for testing purposes, and should be finalized before including this change in any release. [1] https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-09-05 11:44:51 +02:00
/*
* If the group can be shifted, then we can possibly use this
* freedom to produce a more intuitive diff.
*
* The group is currently shifted as far down as possible, so the
* heuristics below only have to handle upwards shifts.
*/
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
if (g.end == earliest_end) {
/* no shifting was possible */
} else if (end_matching_other != -1) {
/*
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
* Move the possibly merged group of changes back to line
* up with the last group of changes from the other file
* that it can align with.
*/
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
while (go.end == go.start) {
if (group_slide_up(xdf, &g, flags))
xdl_bug("match disappeared");
if (group_previous(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken sliding to match");
}
diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs Some groups of added/deleted lines in diffs can be slid up or down, because lines at the edges of the group are not unique. Picking good shifts for such groups is not a matter of correctness but definitely has a big effect on aesthetics. For example, consider the following two diffs. The first is what standard Git emits: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { } if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} +if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { $smtp_server = $_; The following diff is equivalent, but is obviously preferable from an aesthetic point of view: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -230,6 +230,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { $initial_reply_to =~ s/(^\s+|\s+$)//g; } +if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { This patch teaches Git to pick better positions for such "diff sliders" using heuristics that take the positions of nearby blank lines and the indentation of nearby lines into account. The existing Git code basically always shifts such "sliders" as far down in the file as possible. The only exception is when the slider can be aligned with a group of changed lines in the other file, in which case Git favors depicting the change as one add+delete block rather than one add and a slightly offset delete block. This naive algorithm often yields ugly diffs. Commit d634d61ed6 improved the situation somewhat by preferring to position add/delete groups to make their last line a blank line, when that is possible. This heuristic does more good than harm, but (1) it can only help if there are blank lines in the right places, and (2) always picks the last blank line, even if there are others that might be better. The end result is that it makes perhaps 1/3 as many errors as the default Git algorithm, but that still leaves a lot of ugly diffs. This commit implements a new and much better heuristic for picking optimal "slider" positions using the following approach: First observe that each hypothetical positioning of a diff slider introduces two splits: one between the context lines preceding the group and the first added/deleted line, and the other between the last added/deleted line and the first line of context following it. It tries to find the positioning that creates the least bad splits. Splits are evaluated based only on the presence and locations of nearby blank lines, and the indentation of lines near the split. Basically, it prefers to introduce splits adjacent to blank lines, between lines that are indented less, and between lines with the same level of indentation. In more detail: 1. It measures the following characteristics of a proposed splitting position in a `struct split_measurement`: * the number of blank lines above the proposed split * whether the line directly after the split is blank * the number of blank lines following that line * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line above the split * the indentation of the line directly below the split * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line after that line 2. It combines the measured attributes using a bunch of empirically-optimized weighting factors to derive a `struct split_score` that measures the "badness" of splitting the text at that position. 3. It combines the `split_score` for the top and the bottom of the slider at each of its possible positions, and selects the position that has the best `split_score`. I determined the initial set of weighting factors by collecting a corpus of Git histories from 29 open-source software projects in various programming languages. I generated many diffs from this corpus, and determined the best positioning "by eye" for about 6600 diff sliders. I used about half of the repositories in the corpus (corresponding to about 2/3 of the sliders) as a training set, and optimized the weights against this corpus using a crude automated search of the parameter space to get the best agreement with the manually-determined values. Then I tested the resulting heuristic against the full corpus. The results are summarized in the following table, in column `indent-1`: | repository | count | Git 2.9.0 | compaction | compaction-fixed | indent-1 | indent-2 | | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | afnetworking | 109 | 89 (81.7%) | 37 (33.9%) | 37 (33.9%) | 2 (1.8%) | 2 (1.8%) | | alamofire | 30 | 18 (60.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 15 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | angular | 184 | 127 (69.0%) | 39 (21.2%) | 23 (12.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 5 (2.7%) | | animate | 313 | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | | ant | 380 | 356 (93.7%) | 152 (40.0%) | 148 (38.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | * | bugzilla | 306 | 263 (85.9%) | 109 (35.6%) | 99 (32.4%) | 14 (4.6%) | 15 (4.9%) | * | corefx | 126 | 91 (72.2%) | 22 (17.5%) | 21 (16.7%) | 6 (4.8%) | 6 (4.8%) | | couchdb | 78 | 44 (56.4%) | 26 (33.3%) | 28 (35.9%) | 6 (7.7%) | 6 (7.7%) | * | cpython | 937 | 158 (16.9%) | 50 (5.3%) | 49 (5.2%) | 5 (0.5%) | 5 (0.5%) | * | discourse | 160 | 95 (59.4%) | 42 (26.2%) | 36 (22.5%) | 18 (11.2%) | 13 (8.1%) | | docker | 307 | 194 (63.2%) | 198 (64.5%) | 253 (82.4%) | 8 (2.6%) | 8 (2.6%) | * | electron | 163 | 132 (81.0%) | 38 (23.3%) | 39 (23.9%) | 6 (3.7%) | 6 (3.7%) | | git | 536 | 470 (87.7%) | 73 (13.6%) | 78 (14.6%) | 16 (3.0%) | 16 (3.0%) | * | gitflow | 127 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | ionic | 133 | 89 (66.9%) | 29 (21.8%) | 38 (28.6%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | | ipython | 482 | 362 (75.1%) | 167 (34.6%) | 169 (35.1%) | 11 (2.3%) | 11 (2.3%) | * | junit | 161 | 147 (91.3%) | 67 (41.6%) | 66 (41.0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 1 (0.6%) | * | lighttable | 15 | 5 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | magit | 88 | 75 (85.2%) | 11 (12.5%) | 9 (10.2%) | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | | neural-style | 28 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | nodejs | 781 | 649 (83.1%) | 118 (15.1%) | 111 (14.2%) | 4 (0.5%) | 5 (0.6%) | * | phpmyadmin | 491 | 481 (98.0%) | 75 (15.3%) | 48 (9.8%) | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | * | react-native | 168 | 130 (77.4%) | 79 (47.0%) | 81 (48.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | rust | 171 | 128 (74.9%) | 30 (17.5%) | 27 (15.8%) | 16 (9.4%) | 14 (8.2%) | | spark | 186 | 149 (80.1%) | 52 (28.0%) | 52 (28.0%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | | tensorflow | 115 | 66 (57.4%) | 48 (41.7%) | 48 (41.7%) | 5 (4.3%) | 5 (4.3%) | | test-more | 19 | 15 (78.9%) | 2 (10.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | 1 (5.3%) | 1 (5.3%) | * | test-unit | 51 | 34 (66.7%) | 14 (27.5%) | 8 (15.7%) | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (3.9%) | * | xmonad | 23 | 22 (95.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (4.3%) | * | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | totals | 6668 | 4391 (65.9%) | 1496 (22.4%) | 1491 (22.4%) | 150 (2.2%) | 144 (2.2%) | | totals (training set) | 4552 | 3195 (70.2%) | 1053 (23.1%) | 1061 (23.3%) | 86 (1.9%) | 88 (1.9%) | | totals (test set) | 2116 | 1196 (56.5%) | 443 (20.9%) | 430 (20.3%) | 64 (3.0%) | 56 (2.6%) | In this table, the numbers are the count and percentage of human-rated sliders that the corresponding algorithm got *wrong*. The columns are * "repository" - the name of the repository used. I used the diffs between successive non-merge commits on the HEAD branch of the corresponding repository. * "count" - the number of sliders that were human-rated. I chose most, but not all, sliders to rate from those among which the various algorithms gave different answers. * "Git 2.9.0" - the default algorithm used by `git diff` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction-fixed" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` after the fixes from earlier in this patch series. Note that the results are not dramatically different than those for "compaction". Both produce non-ideal diffs only about 1/3 as often as the default `git diff`. * "indent-1" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the first set of weighting factors, determined as described above. * "indent-2" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the final set of weighting factors, determined as described below. * `*` - indicates that repo was part of training set used to determine the first set of weighting factors. The fact that the heuristic performed nearly as well on the test set as on the training set in column "indent-1" is a good indication that the heuristic was not over-trained. Given that fact, I ran a second round of optimization, using the entire corpus as the training set. The resulting set of weights gave the results in column "indent-2". These are the weights included in this patch. The final result gives consistently and significantly better results across the whole corpus than either `git diff` or `git diff --compaction-heuristic`. It makes only about 1/30 as many errors as the former and about 1/10 as many errors as the latter. (And a good fraction of the remaining errors are for diffs that involve weirdly-formatted code, sometimes apparently machine-generated.) The tools that were used to do this optimization and analysis, along with the human-generated data values, are recorded in a separate project [1]. This patch adds a new command-line option `--indent-heuristic`, and a new configuration setting `diff.indentHeuristic`, that activate this heuristic. This interface is only meant for testing purposes, and should be finalized before including this change in any release. [1] https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-09-05 11:44:51 +02:00
} else if (flags & XDF_INDENT_HEURISTIC) {
/*
* Indent heuristic: a group of pure add/delete lines
* implies two splits, one between the end of the "before"
* context and the start of the group, and another between
* the end of the group and the beginning of the "after"
* context. Some splits are aesthetically better and some
* are worse. We compute a badness "score" for each split,
* and add the scores for the two splits to define a
* "score" for each position that the group can be shifted
* to. Then we pick the shift with the lowest score.
*/
long shift, best_shift = -1;
struct split_score best_score;
shift = earliest_end;
if (g.end - groupsize - 1 > shift)
shift = g.end - groupsize - 1;
if (g.end - INDENT_HEURISTIC_MAX_SLIDING > shift)
shift = g.end - INDENT_HEURISTIC_MAX_SLIDING;
for (; shift <= g.end; shift++) {
diff: improve positioning of add/delete blocks in diffs Some groups of added/deleted lines in diffs can be slid up or down, because lines at the edges of the group are not unique. Picking good shifts for such groups is not a matter of correctness but definitely has a big effect on aesthetics. For example, consider the following two diffs. The first is what standard Git emits: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { } if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} +if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { $smtp_server = $_; The following diff is equivalent, but is obviously preferable from an aesthetic point of view: --- a/9c572b21dd090a1e5c5bb397053bf8043ffe7fb4:git-send-email.perl +++ b/6dcfa306f2b67b733a7eb2d7ded1bc9987809edb:git-send-email.perl @@ -230,6 +230,9 @@ if (!defined $initial_reply_to && $prompting) { $initial_reply_to =~ s/(^\s+|\s+$)//g; } +if (!$smtp_server) { + $smtp_server = $repo->config('sendemail.smtpserver'); +} if (!$smtp_server) { foreach (qw( /usr/sbin/sendmail /usr/lib/sendmail )) { if (-x $_) { This patch teaches Git to pick better positions for such "diff sliders" using heuristics that take the positions of nearby blank lines and the indentation of nearby lines into account. The existing Git code basically always shifts such "sliders" as far down in the file as possible. The only exception is when the slider can be aligned with a group of changed lines in the other file, in which case Git favors depicting the change as one add+delete block rather than one add and a slightly offset delete block. This naive algorithm often yields ugly diffs. Commit d634d61ed6 improved the situation somewhat by preferring to position add/delete groups to make their last line a blank line, when that is possible. This heuristic does more good than harm, but (1) it can only help if there are blank lines in the right places, and (2) always picks the last blank line, even if there are others that might be better. The end result is that it makes perhaps 1/3 as many errors as the default Git algorithm, but that still leaves a lot of ugly diffs. This commit implements a new and much better heuristic for picking optimal "slider" positions using the following approach: First observe that each hypothetical positioning of a diff slider introduces two splits: one between the context lines preceding the group and the first added/deleted line, and the other between the last added/deleted line and the first line of context following it. It tries to find the positioning that creates the least bad splits. Splits are evaluated based only on the presence and locations of nearby blank lines, and the indentation of lines near the split. Basically, it prefers to introduce splits adjacent to blank lines, between lines that are indented less, and between lines with the same level of indentation. In more detail: 1. It measures the following characteristics of a proposed splitting position in a `struct split_measurement`: * the number of blank lines above the proposed split * whether the line directly after the split is blank * the number of blank lines following that line * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line above the split * the indentation of the line directly below the split * the indentation of the nearest non-blank line after that line 2. It combines the measured attributes using a bunch of empirically-optimized weighting factors to derive a `struct split_score` that measures the "badness" of splitting the text at that position. 3. It combines the `split_score` for the top and the bottom of the slider at each of its possible positions, and selects the position that has the best `split_score`. I determined the initial set of weighting factors by collecting a corpus of Git histories from 29 open-source software projects in various programming languages. I generated many diffs from this corpus, and determined the best positioning "by eye" for about 6600 diff sliders. I used about half of the repositories in the corpus (corresponding to about 2/3 of the sliders) as a training set, and optimized the weights against this corpus using a crude automated search of the parameter space to get the best agreement with the manually-determined values. Then I tested the resulting heuristic against the full corpus. The results are summarized in the following table, in column `indent-1`: | repository | count | Git 2.9.0 | compaction | compaction-fixed | indent-1 | indent-2 | | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | afnetworking | 109 | 89 (81.7%) | 37 (33.9%) | 37 (33.9%) | 2 (1.8%) | 2 (1.8%) | | alamofire | 30 | 18 (60.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | 15 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | angular | 184 | 127 (69.0%) | 39 (21.2%) | 23 (12.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 5 (2.7%) | | animate | 313 | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | 2 (0.6%) | | ant | 380 | 356 (93.7%) | 152 (40.0%) | 148 (38.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | 15 (3.9%) | * | bugzilla | 306 | 263 (85.9%) | 109 (35.6%) | 99 (32.4%) | 14 (4.6%) | 15 (4.9%) | * | corefx | 126 | 91 (72.2%) | 22 (17.5%) | 21 (16.7%) | 6 (4.8%) | 6 (4.8%) | | couchdb | 78 | 44 (56.4%) | 26 (33.3%) | 28 (35.9%) | 6 (7.7%) | 6 (7.7%) | * | cpython | 937 | 158 (16.9%) | 50 (5.3%) | 49 (5.2%) | 5 (0.5%) | 5 (0.5%) | * | discourse | 160 | 95 (59.4%) | 42 (26.2%) | 36 (22.5%) | 18 (11.2%) | 13 (8.1%) | | docker | 307 | 194 (63.2%) | 198 (64.5%) | 253 (82.4%) | 8 (2.6%) | 8 (2.6%) | * | electron | 163 | 132 (81.0%) | 38 (23.3%) | 39 (23.9%) | 6 (3.7%) | 6 (3.7%) | | git | 536 | 470 (87.7%) | 73 (13.6%) | 78 (14.6%) | 16 (3.0%) | 16 (3.0%) | * | gitflow | 127 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | ionic | 133 | 89 (66.9%) | 29 (21.8%) | 38 (28.6%) | 1 (0.8%) | 1 (0.8%) | | ipython | 482 | 362 (75.1%) | 167 (34.6%) | 169 (35.1%) | 11 (2.3%) | 11 (2.3%) | * | junit | 161 | 147 (91.3%) | 67 (41.6%) | 66 (41.0%) | 1 (0.6%) | 1 (0.6%) | * | lighttable | 15 | 5 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (13.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | magit | 88 | 75 (85.2%) | 11 (12.5%) | 9 (10.2%) | 1 (1.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | | neural-style | 28 | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | nodejs | 781 | 649 (83.1%) | 118 (15.1%) | 111 (14.2%) | 4 (0.5%) | 5 (0.6%) | * | phpmyadmin | 491 | 481 (98.0%) | 75 (15.3%) | 48 (9.8%) | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | * | react-native | 168 | 130 (77.4%) | 79 (47.0%) | 81 (48.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | | rust | 171 | 128 (74.9%) | 30 (17.5%) | 27 (15.8%) | 16 (9.4%) | 14 (8.2%) | | spark | 186 | 149 (80.1%) | 52 (28.0%) | 52 (28.0%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | | tensorflow | 115 | 66 (57.4%) | 48 (41.7%) | 48 (41.7%) | 5 (4.3%) | 5 (4.3%) | | test-more | 19 | 15 (78.9%) | 2 (10.5%) | 2 (10.5%) | 1 (5.3%) | 1 (5.3%) | * | test-unit | 51 | 34 (66.7%) | 14 (27.5%) | 8 (15.7%) | 2 (3.9%) | 2 (3.9%) | * | xmonad | 23 | 22 (95.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 2 (8.7%) | 1 (4.3%) | 1 (4.3%) | * | --------------------- | ----- | -------------- | -------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | -------------- | | totals | 6668 | 4391 (65.9%) | 1496 (22.4%) | 1491 (22.4%) | 150 (2.2%) | 144 (2.2%) | | totals (training set) | 4552 | 3195 (70.2%) | 1053 (23.1%) | 1061 (23.3%) | 86 (1.9%) | 88 (1.9%) | | totals (test set) | 2116 | 1196 (56.5%) | 443 (20.9%) | 430 (20.3%) | 64 (3.0%) | 56 (2.6%) | In this table, the numbers are the count and percentage of human-rated sliders that the corresponding algorithm got *wrong*. The columns are * "repository" - the name of the repository used. I used the diffs between successive non-merge commits on the HEAD branch of the corresponding repository. * "count" - the number of sliders that were human-rated. I chose most, but not all, sliders to rate from those among which the various algorithms gave different answers. * "Git 2.9.0" - the default algorithm used by `git diff` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` in Git 2.9.0. * "compaction-fixed" - the heuristic used by `git diff --compaction-heuristic` after the fixes from earlier in this patch series. Note that the results are not dramatically different than those for "compaction". Both produce non-ideal diffs only about 1/3 as often as the default `git diff`. * "indent-1" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the first set of weighting factors, determined as described above. * "indent-2" - the new `--indent-heuristic` algorithm, using the final set of weighting factors, determined as described below. * `*` - indicates that repo was part of training set used to determine the first set of weighting factors. The fact that the heuristic performed nearly as well on the test set as on the training set in column "indent-1" is a good indication that the heuristic was not over-trained. Given that fact, I ran a second round of optimization, using the entire corpus as the training set. The resulting set of weights gave the results in column "indent-2". These are the weights included in this patch. The final result gives consistently and significantly better results across the whole corpus than either `git diff` or `git diff --compaction-heuristic`. It makes only about 1/30 as many errors as the former and about 1/10 as many errors as the latter. (And a good fraction of the remaining errors are for diffs that involve weirdly-formatted code, sometimes apparently machine-generated.) The tools that were used to do this optimization and analysis, along with the human-generated data values, are recorded in a separate project [1]. This patch adds a new command-line option `--indent-heuristic`, and a new configuration setting `diff.indentHeuristic`, that activate this heuristic. This interface is only meant for testing purposes, and should be finalized before including this change in any release. [1] https://github.com/mhagger/diff-slider-tools Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-09-05 11:44:51 +02:00
struct split_measurement m;
struct split_score score = {0, 0};
measure_split(xdf, shift, &m);
score_add_split(&m, &score);
measure_split(xdf, shift - groupsize, &m);
score_add_split(&m, &score);
if (best_shift == -1 ||
score_cmp(&score, &best_score) <= 0) {
best_score.effective_indent = score.effective_indent;
best_score.penalty = score.penalty;
best_shift = shift;
}
}
while (g.end > best_shift) {
if (group_slide_up(xdf, &g, flags))
xdl_bug("best shift unreached");
if (group_previous(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken sliding to blank line");
}
}
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
next:
/* Move past the just-processed group: */
if (group_next(xdf, &g))
break;
if (group_next(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken moving to next group");
}
xdl_change_compact(): introduce the concept of a change group The idea of xdl_change_compact() is fairly simple: * Proceed through groups of changed lines in the file to be compacted, keeping track of the corresponding location in the "other" file. * If possible, slide the group up and down to try to give the most aesthetically pleasing diff. Whenever it is slid, the current location in the other file needs to be adjusted. But these simple concepts are obfuscated by a lot of index handling that is written in terse, subtle, and varied patterns. I found it very hard to convince myself that the function was correct. So introduce a "struct group" that represents a group of changed lines in a file. Add some functions that perform elementary operations on groups: * Initialize a group to the first group in a file * Move to the next or previous group in a file * Slide a group up or down Even though the resulting code is longer, I think it is easier to understand and review. Its performance is not changed appreciably (though it would be if `group_next()` and `group_previous()` were not inlined). ...and in fact, the rewriting helped me discover another bug in the --compaction-heuristic code: The update of blank_lines was never done for the highest possible position of the group. This means that it could fail to slide the group to its highest possible position, even if that position had a blank line as its last line. So for example, it yielded the following diff: $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 A + +B + +A 2 when in fact the following diff is better (according to the rules of --compaction-heuristic): $ git diff --no-index --compaction-heuristic a.txt b.txt diff --git a/a.txt b/b.txt index e53969f..0d60c5fe 100644 --- a/a.txt +++ b/b.txt @@ -1,3 +1,7 @@ 1 +A + +B + A 2 The new code gives the bottom answer. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-08-22 13:22:44 +02:00
if (!group_next(xdfo, &go))
xdl_bug("group sync broken at end of file");
return 0;
}
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
int xdl_build_script(xdfenv_t *xe, xdchange_t **xscr) {
xdchange_t *cscr = NULL, *xch;
char *rchg1 = xe->xdf1.rchg, *rchg2 = xe->xdf2.rchg;
long i1, i2, l1, l2;
/*
* Trivial. Collects "groups" of changes and creates an edit script.
*/
for (i1 = xe->xdf1.nrec, i2 = xe->xdf2.nrec; i1 >= 0 || i2 >= 0; i1--, i2--)
if (rchg1[i1 - 1] || rchg2[i2 - 1]) {
for (l1 = i1; rchg1[i1 - 1]; i1--);
for (l2 = i2; rchg2[i2 - 1]; i2--);
if (!(xch = xdl_add_change(cscr, i1, i2, l1 - i1, l2 - i2))) {
xdl_free_script(cscr);
return -1;
}
cscr = xch;
}
*xscr = cscr;
return 0;
}
void xdl_free_script(xdchange_t *xscr) {
xdchange_t *xch;
while ((xch = xscr) != NULL) {
xscr = xscr->next;
xdl_free(xch);
}
}
static int xdl_call_hunk_func(xdfenv_t *xe, xdchange_t *xscr, xdemitcb_t *ecb,
xdemitconf_t const *xecfg)
{
xdchange_t *xch, *xche;
for (xch = xscr; xch; xch = xche->next) {
xche = xdl_get_hunk(&xch, xecfg);
if (!xch)
break;
if (xecfg->hunk_func(xch->i1, xche->i1 + xche->chg1 - xch->i1,
xch->i2, xche->i2 + xche->chg2 - xch->i2,
ecb->priv) < 0)
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
static void xdl_mark_ignorable(xdchange_t *xscr, xdfenv_t *xe, long flags)
{
xdchange_t *xch;
for (xch = xscr; xch; xch = xch->next) {
int ignore = 1;
xrecord_t **rec;
long i;
rec = &xe->xdf1.recs[xch->i1];
for (i = 0; i < xch->chg1 && ignore; i++)
ignore = xdl_blankline(rec[i]->ptr, rec[i]->size, flags);
rec = &xe->xdf2.recs[xch->i2];
for (i = 0; i < xch->chg2 && ignore; i++)
ignore = xdl_blankline(rec[i]->ptr, rec[i]->size, flags);
xch->ignore = ignore;
}
}
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
int xdl_diff(mmfile_t *mf1, mmfile_t *mf2, xpparam_t const *xpp,
xdemitconf_t const *xecfg, xdemitcb_t *ecb) {
xdchange_t *xscr;
xdfenv_t xe;
emit_func_t ef = xecfg->hunk_func ? xdl_call_hunk_func : xdl_emit_diff;
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
if (xdl_do_diff(mf1, mf2, xpp, &xe) < 0) {
return -1;
}
if (xdl_change_compact(&xe.xdf1, &xe.xdf2, xpp->flags) < 0 ||
xdl_change_compact(&xe.xdf2, &xe.xdf1, xpp->flags) < 0 ||
xdl_build_script(&xe, &xscr) < 0) {
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
xdl_free_env(&xe);
return -1;
}
if (xscr) {
if (xpp->flags & XDF_IGNORE_BLANK_LINES)
xdl_mark_ignorable(xscr, &xe, xpp->flags);
if (ef(&xe, xscr, ecb, xecfg) < 0) {
Use a *real* built-in diff generator This uses a simplified libxdiff setup to generate unified diffs _without_ doing fork/execve of GNU "diff". This has several huge advantages, for example: Before: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m24.818s user 0m13.332s sys 0m8.664s After: [torvalds@g5 linux]$ time git diff v2.6.16.. > /dev/null real 0m4.563s user 0m2.944s sys 0m1.580s and the fact that this should be a lot more portable (ie we can ignore all the issues with doing fork/execve under Windows). Perhaps even more importantly, this allows us to do diffs without actually ever writing out the git file contents to a temporary file (and without any of the shell quoting issues on filenames etc etc). NOTE! THIS PATCH DOES NOT DO THAT OPTIMIZATION YET! I was lazy, and the current "diff-core" code actually will always write the temp-files, because it used to be something that you simply had to do. So this current one actually writes a temp-file like before, and then reads it into memory again just to do the diff. Stupid. But if this basic infrastructure is accepted, we can start switching over diff-core to not write temp-files, which should speed things up even further, especially when doing big tree-to-tree diffs. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I should also point out a few downsides: - the libxdiff algorithm is different, and I bet GNU diff has gotten a lot more testing. And the thing is, generating a diff is not an exact science - you can get two different diffs (and you will), and they can both be perfectly valid. So it's not possible to "validate" the libxdiff output by just comparing it against GNU diff. - GNU diff does some nice eye-candy, like trying to figure out what the last function was, and adding that information to the "@@ .." line. libxdiff doesn't do that. - The libxdiff thing has some known deficiencies. In particular, it gets the "\No newline at end of file" case wrong. So this is currently for the experimental branch only. I hope Davide will help fix it. That said, I think the huge performance advantage, and the fact that it integrates better is definitely worth it. But it should go into a development branch at least due to the missing newline issue. Technical note: this is based on libxdiff-0.17, but I did some surgery to get rid of the extraneous fat - stuff that git doesn't need, and seriously cutting down on mmfile_t, which had much more capabilities than the diff algorithm either needed or used. In this version, "mmfile_t" is just a trivial <pointer,length> tuple. That said, I tried to keep the differences to simple removals, so that you can do a diff between this and the libxdiff origin, and you'll basically see just things getting deleted. Even the mmfile_t simplifications are left in a state where the diffs should be readable. Apologies to Davide, whom I'd love to get feedback on this all from (I wrote my own "fill_mmfile()" for the new simpler mmfile_t format: the old complex format had a helper function for that, but I did my surgery with the goal in mind that eventually we _should_ just do mmfile_t mf; buf = read_sha1_file(sha1, type, &size); mf->ptr = buf; mf->size = size; .. use "mf" directly .. which was really a nightmare with the old "helpful" mmfile_t, and really is that easy with the new cut-down interfaces). [ Btw, as any hawk-eye can see from the diff, this was actually generated with itself, so it is "self-hosting". That's about all the testing it has gotten, along with the above kernel diff, which eye-balls correctly, but shows the newline issue when you double-check it with "git-apply" ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-03-25 05:13:22 +01:00
xdl_free_script(xscr);
xdl_free_env(&xe);
return -1;
}
xdl_free_script(xscr);
}
xdl_free_env(&xe);
return 0;
}