path: root/merge-recursive.h
diff options
authorElijah Newren <>2019-08-17 18:41:24 (GMT)
committerJunio C Hamano <>2019-08-19 17:08:03 (GMT)
commit743474cbfa8b65016dd02b4e56dd9f47f95652c3 (patch)
treee7376d54acfd48e497cb836635e9f48338bd9385 /merge-recursive.h
parent139ef37a2f4daf2071debeca8b2115b4e4b0a33f (diff)
merge-recursive: provide a better label for diff3 common ancestor
In commit 7ca56aa07619 ("merge-recursive: add a label for ancestor", 2010-03-20), a label was added for the '||||||' line to make it have the more informative heading '|||||| merged common ancestors', with the statement: It would be nicer to use a more informative label. Perhaps someone will provide one some day. This chosen label was perfectly reasonable when recursiveness kicks in, i.e. when there are multiple merge bases. (I can't think of a better label in such cases.) But it is actually somewhat misleading when there is a unique merge base or no merge base. Change this based on the number of merge bases: >=2: "merged common ancestors" 1: <abbreviated commit hash> 0: "<empty tree>" Tests have also been added to check that we get the right ancestor name for each of the three cases. Also, since merge_recursive() and merge_trees() have polar opposite pre-conditions for opt->ancestor, document merge_recursive()'s pre-condition with an assertion. (An assertion was added to merge_trees() already a few commits ago.) The differences in pre-conditions stem from two factors: (1) merge_trees() does not recurse and thus does not have multiple sub-merges to worry about -- each of which would require a different value for opt->ancestor, (2) merge_trees() is only passed trees rather than commits and thus cannot internally guess as good of a label. Thus, while external callers of merge_trees() are required to provide a non-NULL opt->ancestor, merge_recursive() expects to set this value itself. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
Diffstat (limited to 'merge-recursive.h')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions