On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 08:31:52 -0800, David Roundy wrote: > In your example you left out a + on the space between the two subroutines. > But it does look like in this example darcs doesn't generate a true LCS, as > even with the added line, darcs is generating a non-minimal diff. This > would be a result of a performance improvement, which was added because a > true LCS takes O(N^2) time (which is problematic for people with > multi-megabyte text files). Perhaps we should have a heuristic that allows > us to use a true LCS on smaller files. (Note that if there was a > whitespace change in the _generate_accessor_method line, then darcs did > make an optimal choice). The algorithm darcs now uses, by the way, is the > same one used by GNU diff. (But not original diff, which used a true LCS, > but scaled worse than GNU diff.)
I would really like the possibility of forcing real LCS or fake LCS, as well as a middle ground specified using file size for my cases. There was no whitespace change, for the record. > There's also often an ambguity in deciding which lines were added where, > and there's no way to determine what the user means. We've tried to use a > heuristic to (among equivalently minimal descriptions of a change) select a > reasonable change, but it's tricky, as the "best" choice is often very > different, depending on Perhaps the interactivity of darcs can be used here? (Allow the user to have an option to try to cycle through the computed changes on a per file or even per hunk basis). -- Yuval Kogman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://nothingmuch.woobling.org 0xEBD27418
pgpv2jt5StTyj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
