Merge branch 'en/random-cleanups'

Miscellaneous code clean-ups.

* en/random-cleanups:
  merge-ort: remove extraneous word in comment
  merge-ort: fix accidental strset<->strintmap
  t7615: be more explicit about diff algorithm used
  t6423: fix a comment that accidentally reversed two commits
  stash: remove merge-recursive.h include
main
Junio C Hamano 2025-03-29 16:39:10 +09:00
commit ff926a6d1b
4 changed files with 10 additions and 11 deletions

View File

@ -13,7 +13,6 @@
#include "lockfile.h"
#include "cache-tree.h"
#include "unpack-trees.h"
#include "merge-recursive.h"
#include "merge-ort-wrappers.h"
#include "strvec.h"
#include "run-command.h"

View File

@ -1517,8 +1517,8 @@ static int handle_deferred_entries(struct merge_options *opt,
struct strintmap copy;

/* Loop over the set of paths we need to know rename info for */
strset_for_each_entry(&renames->relevant_sources[side],
&iter, entry) {
strintmap_for_each_entry(&renames->relevant_sources[side],
&iter, entry) {
char *rename_target, *dir, *dir_marker;
struct strmap_entry *e;

@ -3430,9 +3430,9 @@ static int collect_renames(struct merge_options *opt,
skip_directory_renames:
/*
* p->score comes back from diffcore_rename_extended() with
* the similarity of the renamed file. The similarity is
* was used to determine that the two files were related
* and are a rename, which we have already used, but beyond
* the similarity of the renamed file. The similarity was
* used to determine that the two files were related and
* are a rename, which we have already used, but beyond
* that we have no use for the similarity. So p->score is
* now irrelevant. However, process_renames() will need to
* know which side of the merge this rename was associated

View File

@ -5590,9 +5590,9 @@ test_expect_success '13b(info): messages for transitive rename with conflicted c
# Commit A: y/{b,c,d}, x/e
# Commit B: z/{b,c,d}, x/e
# Expected: y/{b,c,d}, x/e, with info or conflict messages for d
# A: renamed x/d -> z/d; B: renamed z/ -> y/ AND renamed x/d to y/d
# One could argue A had partial knowledge of what was done with
# d and B had full knowledge, but that's a slippery slope as
# B: renamed x/d -> z/d; A: renamed z/ -> y/ AND renamed x/d to y/d
# One could argue B had partial knowledge of what was done with
# d and A had full knowledge, but that's a slippery slope as
# shown in testcase 13d.

test_setup_13c () {

View File

@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ GIT_TEST_MERGE_ALGORITHM=recursive

test_expect_success 'merge c2 to c1 with recursive merge strategy fails with the current default myers diff algorithm' '
git reset --hard c1 &&
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive c2
test_must_fail git merge -s recursive -Xdiff-algorithm=myers c2
'

test_expect_success 'merge c2 to c1 with recursive merge strategy succeeds with -Xdiff-algorithm=histogram' '
@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ test_expect_success 'merge c2 to c1 with recursive merge strategy succeeds with

test_expect_success 'cherry-pick c2 to c1 with recursive merge strategy fails with the current default myers diff algorithm' '
git reset --hard c1 &&
test_must_fail git cherry-pick -s recursive c2
test_must_fail git cherry-pick -s recursive -Xdiff-algorithm=myers c2
'

test_expect_success 'cherry-pick c2 to c1 with recursive merge strategy succeeds with -Xdiff-algorithm=histogram' '