I plan to make `RepoLoader::init()` return a `Result`, which means
that `WorkspaceLoader::load()` will need to return more kinds of
errors. Making it return `WorkspaceLoadError` is a good start. By also
extracting a function for converting `WorkspaceLoadError` to
`CommandError`, we can reuse a the handling of `PathError` in
`cli_util`.
I'm about to make `RepoLoader::init()` return a `Result`, and I don't
want to have to wrap that in a new error in
`ReadonlyRepo::load_at_head()` since that's only used in tests.
This should fix#1304. I think the added test simulates the behavior of
multiple rebase conflicts, but I don't have expertise around this.
add_index could be replaced with a peekable iterator, but the iterator version
wouldn't be as readable as the current implementation.
The outermost "op-log" label isn't moved to the default template. I think
it belongs to the command's formatter rather than the template.
Old bikeshedding items:
- "current_head", "is_head", or "is_head_op"
=> renamed to "current_operation"
- "templates.op-log" vs "templates.op_log" (the whole template is labeled
as "op-log")
=> renamed to "op_log"
- "template-aliases.'format_operation_duration(time_range)'"
=> renamed to 'format_time_range(time_range)'
The type doesn't seem to provide any benefit. I don't think I had a
good reason for creating it in the first place; it was probably just
unfamiliarity with Rust.
This is another step towards removing `RevsetIterator`. These types
are private, so someone using the library can't accidentally create a
`UnionRevsetIterator` with inputs in different order, for example.
I was thinking of replacing `RevsetIterator` by a regular
`Iterator<Item=IndexEntry>`. However, that would make it easier to
pass in an iterator that produces revisions in a non-topological order
into `RevsetGraphIterator`, which would produce unexpected results (it
would result in nodes that are not connected to their parents, if
their parents had already been emitted). I think it makes sense to
instead pass in a revset into `RevsetGraphIterator`.
Incidentally, it will also be useful to have the full revset available
in `RevsetGraphIterator` if we rewrite the algorithm to be more
similar to Mercurial's and Sapling's algorithm, which involves asking
the revset if it contains parent revisions.
We write conflict to the working copy by materializing them as
conflict markers in a file. When the file has been modified (or just
the mtime has changed), we parse the markers to reconstruct the
conflict. For example, let's say we see this conflict marker:
```
<<<<<<<
+++++++
b
%%%%%%%
-a
+c
>>>>>>>
```
Then we will create a hunk with ["a"] as removed and ["b", "c"] as
added.
Now, since commit b84be06c08, when we materialize conflicts, we
minimize the diff part of the marker (the `%%%%%%%` part). The problem
is that that minimization may result in a different order of the
positive conflict terms. That's particularly bad because we do the
minimization per hunk, so we can end up reconstructing an input that
never existed.
This commit fixes the bug by only considering the next add and the one
after that, and emitting either only the first with `%%%%%%%`, or both
of them, with the first one in `++++++++` and the second one in
`%%%%%%%`.
Note that the recent fix to add context to modify/delete conflicts
means that when we parse modified such conflicts, we'll always
consider them resolved, since the expected adds/removes we pass will
not match what's actually in the file. That doesn't seem so bad, and
it's not obvious what the fix should be, so I'll leave that for later.
The function only needs the `TreeValue` so it makes more sense this
way, I think. That will also let the caller keep the rest of the
`Conflict` value owned (though there is nothing but the `value` field
in it right now).
It took a while before I realized that conflicts could be modeled as
simple algebraic expressions with positive and negative terms (they
were modeled as recursive 3-way conflicts initially). We've been
thinking of them that way for a while now, so let's make the
`ConflictPart` name match that model.
When we materialize modify/delete conflicts, we currently don't
include any context lines. That's because modify/delete conflicts have
only two sides, so there's no common base to compare to. Hunks that
are unchanged on the "modify" side are therefore not considered
conflicting, and since they they don't contribute new changes, they're
simply skipped (here:
3dfedf5814/lib/src/files.rs (L228-L230)).
It seems more useful to instead pretend that the missing side is an
empty file. That way we'll get a conflict in the entire file.
We can still decide later to make e.g. `jj resolve` prompt the user on
modify/delete conflicts just like `hg resolve` does (or maybe it
actually happens earlier there, I don't remember).
Closes#1244.
If I understand correctly, the 'revset lifetimes on `Box<dyn
Revset<'index> + 'revset>` are not constrained by the lifetime of a
revset; we don't have any revsets that borrow data from other
revsets. Instead, they're all about constraining a boxed revset to the
index's lifetime. Without the lifetime annotation, it would default to
'static, and the borrow-checker doesn't like `dyn Revset<'index> +
'static`, since the revset could then live longer than the index it
borrows.
It's been about 10 weeks and 730 commits since 0.6.0, compared to
about 7 weeks and 350 commits between 0.5.0 and 0.6.0, so it's time
for a new release. There's been significant user-visible changes and
code-quality improvements. Thanks, everyone!
This is just a little preparation for extracting a `Repo` trait that's
implemented by both `ReadonlyRepo` and `MutableRepo`. The `index()`
function in that trait will of course have to return the same type in
both implementations, and that type will be `&dyn Index`.
Even though we don't know the details yet, we know that we want to
make the index pluggable like the commit and opstore
backends. Defining a trait for it should be a good step. We can refine
the trait later.
