From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Konstantin Kharlamov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#35062: [PATCH v3 1/3] Remove redundant comparison Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:03:05 +0300 Message-ID: <1555347785.24195.0@yandex.ru> References: <1554071761.31929.0@yandex.ru> <20190407021331.948-1-Hi-Angel@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="54283"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: 35062@debbugs.gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 15 19:04:21 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51o-000Dzl-JA for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 19:04:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53360 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51n-0004K4-GP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:04:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37692) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51Y-0004If-0O for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:04:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51X-0004pe-1p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:04:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50015) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51W-0004oo-Sm for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:04:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hG51W-0006QK-IE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:04:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Konstantin Kharlamov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 17:04:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 35062 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 35062-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B35062.155534780024636 (code B ref 35062); Mon, 15 Apr 2019 17:04:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 35062) by debbugs.gnu.org; 15 Apr 2019 17:03:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35326 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hG50o-0006PG-AU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:03:19 -0400 Original-Received: from forward103p.mail.yandex.net ([77.88.28.106]:50346) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hG50l-0006P0-I8 for 35062@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:03:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mxback15o.mail.yandex.net (mxback15o.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1a2d::66]) by forward103p.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 5631A18C0459; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:03:08 +0300 (MSK) Original-Received: from smtp2o.mail.yandex.net (smtp2o.mail.yandex.net [2a02:6b8:0:1a2d::26]) by mxback15o.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTP id At7ofRSphQ-3788s8oL; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:03:08 +0300 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1555347788; bh=S8lcAC+fzRxpcdFN0E0v2hzGooctGhBoms/svvimdXU=; h=In-Reply-To:Cc:To:Subject:From:References:Date:Message-Id; b=HZTR3S//8RCMIHdzWyJP2PNozw1WcuszK8ZOICoEVNx8VaRWByu/q/b36DjQVkM4O E36BBzV0L/ZY1SHoi+ilfMvrVhK7zUKxebcHUTmnISkPCXAai9AgCw8QU8cqQoRjzg AUOQkaksD4rUyfF2z/7FYBko78z4p9zGHbCUV7OY= Authentication-Results: mxback15o.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Original-Received: by smtp2o.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id oHiddmWuAG-36AiWw1B; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 20:03:07 +0300 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) In-Reply-To: <83ef63i99q.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: geary/master~g59ef85ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:157668 Archived-At: =D0=92 =D0=9F=D0=BD, =D0=B0=D0=BF=D1=80 15, 2019 at 18:21, Eli Zaretskii =20 =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB: >> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 18:01:35 +0300 >> From: Konstantin Kharlamov >> Cc: rms@gnu.org, 35062@debbugs.gnu.org >>=20 >> > That's true, but this is not such a situation: the original=20 >> changes >> > were never committed without any modifications. >>=20 >> Well, given the line my patch modifies has no changes, the only >> modification was the commit message. My only mistake was not knowing >> that UTF8 is prohibited. But really, it's a 2 symbols text=20 >> replacement, >> me or you could just replace it. >=20 > No, the log message was not the problem. Look at the code changes, > they were the ones I modified. The line that I changed is exactly the same. What you did is cleaning=20 up the function even further, however that didn't touch my=20 modifications. Your modification is not strictly relevant to my patch. >> Is there an extra work? The changes you added can be commited with=20 >> =CE=B1) >> git commit --amend -v, or =CE=B2) git commit -v. You did =CE=B1, which = only >> differs from =CE=B2 by a number of characters, that is ironically=20 >> smaller >> in =CE=B2. >=20 > Yes, this is extra work: it requires one more commit. More steps, > more opportunities to make mistakes, etc. And that's if I'm not > interrupted in the middle of it by something in Real Life, or someone > pushes to upstream in-between, and I need to pull again and perhaps > resolve conflicts. I'd rather avoid such complications for a simple > job like that. Okay, let's compare: 1. Doing extra commit: "git commit" 2. Changing last commit "git commit --amend" You did 2, do you see how 1 has less symbols? What other extra steps did you take, writing the commit message? But=20 since you rewrote mine anyway, this step you would take for either of 1=20 and 2. =