On 06/03/2012 15:12, Michael Hendricks wrote: > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Ganesh Sittampalam <[email protected]> wrote: >> It's also that, whether or not you have the patch data, the naive >> algorithm is O(n^2) to commute the minimal context of a single patch, >> and I don't know a more sophisticated one (though I have some vague ideas). > > That makes sense. I wonder if Eric's suggestion to only consider > patches not in a tag makes O(n^2) feasible. Roughly how many commutes > per second can Darcs handle? 100, thousand, ten thousand? If n were > too large, Darcs could always fall back to the current behavior.
> When generating a patch bundle, it seems that minimal context is more > aggressive than we need. A "reduced context" might be sufficient. I > imagine just commuting F backwards until it fails to commute or it > reaches a tag. That would be O(n) and probably removes most patches > that are obviously not relevant to the context. Yes, I agree it would be fine just to consider some subset of patches for this use case using whatever heuristic, and I think that e.g. 100 patches would be absolutely fine. The only difficulty is picking a heuristic that won't cause fresh confusion when it doesn't work out. Ganesh _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
