Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:42:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> John Keeping writes: >> >> > Perhaps it's best to leave the patch as it originally was to guarantee >> > that we can't get stuck in graph_show_commit(), even when it's called at >> > an unexpected time, bu

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-11 Thread John Keeping
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 08:42:21AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping writes: > > > Perhaps it's best to leave the patch as it originally was to guarantee > > that we can't get stuck in graph_show_commit(), even when it's called at > > an unexpected time, but I see you've already squashe

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > Perhaps it's best to leave the patch as it originally was to guarantee > that we can't get stuck in graph_show_commit(), even when it's called at > an unexpected time, but I see you've already squashed this change in. > > Would you prefer me to resend the original patch or

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-11 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 02:38:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping writes: > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:30:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > ... > >> Is it correct to say that this essentially re-does 656197ad3805 > >> (graph.c: infinite loop in git whatchanged --graph -m, 2009-0

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:30:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> Is it correct to say that this essentially re-does 656197ad3805 >> (graph.c: infinite loop in git whatchanged --graph -m, 2009-07-25) >> in a slightly different way, in that Michał's original fix also

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-10 Thread John Keeping
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:30:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping writes: > > > Can you squash this into the first commit before you do? > > > > Matthieu is correct that the graph_is_commit_finished() check isn't > > needed in the loop now that we've pulled it out to be checked first

Re: [PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-10 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > Can you squash this into the first commit before you do? > > Matthieu is correct that the graph_is_commit_finished() check isn't > needed in the loop now that we've pulled it out to be checked first - > the value returned can't change during the loop. I've left the early >

[PATCH] fixup! graph: output padding for merge subsequent parents

2013-02-10 Thread John Keeping
--- On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 03:39:33PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * jk/diff-graph-cleanup (2013-02-07) 6 commits > - combine-diff.c: teach combined diffs about line prefix > - diff.c: use diff_line_prefix() where applicable > - diff: add diff_line_prefix function > - diff.c: make constant s