[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: diff --summarize

From: Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:20:36 +0100

I discovered today that the network traffic generated by my rewrite of
"diff --summarize" is ridiculously heavy - like apparently 100 times
what it was, in a simple real-world test. I have an obvious patch which
I'll apply soon which eliminates the requests for content of deleted
files, and that reduces it by a factor of ten, but I haven't yet figured
out where the other 10x is happening. I'll figure it out or else I'll
have to revert it all, of course.

Neels J Hofmeyr wrote:
> On 08/24/2011 05:38 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Even from a practical POV, the orthogonality is useful. I have a script
> > [...]
> heh yeah, you actually gave me that script back in the days, and with lesser
> tweaks, I use that code all the time to semi-auto-generate my log messages
> [...] I really like it, thank you very much indeed.

I'm very glad. I still use it all the time too.

> Oh, have you by any chance made it act super precise by now? That would be a
> treat.

In terms of "--show-c-function" correctly identifying

  +/* New doc */
  -/* old doc */
   void foo(void);

as a change belonging to "foo"? No, haven't done that.

> But, I don't really understand, why do you want to semi-auto-generate a log
> message for already committed revisions?

I don't really want that, but there might come a time when I would want
that. I'm only fooling around with hypothetical use cases.

- Julian
Received on 2011-08-25 18:21:14 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.