Hi, "Jason Dagit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I know you're working on a bug in repair, and I had a thought today. > > If your fixes to repair end up rewriting patches it could end up > triggering bugs in get_common_and_uncommon. I have a write up of why > it's bad to change the commutativity of patches buried in the issue > description of issue27. Basically, if there are two branches and you > rewrite the patches in one branch then operations between the two that > use get_common_and_uncommon (most operations), could violate a darcs > invariant. The invariant is that once a patch is created it will > continue to commute the same way.
just to clarify, I haven't changed anything behaviour-wise. Patch changes have been happening the same way before as they are now. The bug is just a performance issue... Yours, Petr. -- Peter Rockai | me()mornfall!net | prockai()redhat!com http://blog.mornfall.net | http://web.mornfall.net "In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be indented six feet downward and covered with dirt." -- Blair P. Houghton on the subject of C program indentation _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
