On 3/16/23 23:58, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 11:30:50PM +0100, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 3/16/23 01:20, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>>> But try reading the diff while looking for the cause of a bug. It's the
>>> difference between reading 50, two-line changes, and reading a hunk that
>>> replaces 100 lines with a different 100 lines, with empty/unrelated
>>> lines randomly thrown in as context.
>>
>> I don't know, maybe I'm doing something wrong or maybe I just am bad at
>> looking at diffs, but if I apply the patch you submitted on 8/3 and do
>> the git-diff above (output attached), it seems pretty incomprehensible
>> to me :-( I don't see 50 two-line changes (I certainly wouldn't be able
>> to identify the root cause of the bug based on that).
>
> It's true that most of the diff is still incomprehensible...
>
> But look at the part relevant to the "empty-data" bug:
>
Well, yeah. If you know where to look, and if you squint just the right
way, then you can see any bug. I don't think I'd be able to spot the bug
in the diff unless I knew in advance what the bug is.
That being said, I don't object to moving the function etc. Unless there
are alternative ideas how to fix the empty-data issue, I'll get this
committed after playing with it a bit more.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
