Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

On Thu, 8 May 2014, Jianyu Zhan wrote: That being said, storing abstract syntax tree, instead of raw object in git. But that goes too far... well, there are the clean/smudge filters, you can have it run everything through a prettyprinter as it's checked in. with a little effort, you could d

Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

Jianyu Zhan writes: > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Jeff King wrote: >> Try "tig blame"[1]; from the blame view, the "," command will restart >> the blame at REF^ automatically. If you don't mind a more graphical >> interface, I think "git gui blame" can also reblame from the parent from >> t

Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

On 08/05/14 18:54, Jianyu Zhan wrote: > Usually, a trivial change(like coding style fix) may bury a > original change of the code, and thus git blame is of less > help. And to address this situation, I have to do like this: > >git blame -s REF^ > temp > > to dig into the history recursively

Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Jeff King wrote: > Try "tig blame"[1]; from the blame view, the "," command will restart > the blame at REF^ automatically. If you don't mind a more graphical > interface, I think "git gui blame" can also reblame from the parent from > the right-click context menu.

Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

Jianyu Zhan writes: > Usually, a trivial change(like coding style fix) may bury a > original change of the code, and thus git blame is of less > help. And to address this situation, I have to do like this: > >git blame -s REF^ > temp > > to dig into the history recursively by hand, to find o

Re: Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 02:54:56PM +0800, Jianyu Zhan wrote: > Usually, a trivial change(like coding style fix) may bury a > original change of the code, and thus git blame is of less > help. And to address this situation, I have to do like this: > >git blame -s REF^ > temp > > to dig into

Is there any efficient way to track history of a piece of code?

Usually, a trivial change(like coding style fix) may bury a original change of the code, and thus git blame is of less help. And to address this situation, I have to do like this: git blame -s REF^ > temp to dig into the history recursively by hand, to find out the original change. Here, REF