[m-rev.] Updated diff for deep profiling.

[Zoltan Somogyi]

On 29-May-2001, Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> If interdiff doesn't work, you can produce a relative diff by checking
> out two fresh copies of the repository (using a tag or date which
> matches the workspace that you used to produce the diffs, to avoid any
> new conflicts), applying the old and new diffs that you posted, and
> then using `diff --recursive'.

This would produce a diff in which most changes are the result of
"cvs update", i.e. changes on the trunk between the two dates. And applying
the old diff to a current workspace would produce conflicts, as you say.

> I think it is important to always produce relative diffs for any
> substantial changes.  IMHO code should not be committed into the
> repository unless the other members of the group are given the
> opportunity to review it.  And reposting a 25000 line diff in which
> some new changes are scattered (like needles in a haystack ;-) does not
> really give any effective opportunity for review.

You have been given opportunities already. You can go through your review
comments and see how they were addressed.

If it takes someone who makes a change X hours make a diff easier to review,
and this makes the reviewer complete his task Y hours more quickly, the project
wins only if X < Y. Don't insist that Y be optimized regardless of the increase
in X just because you are the reviewer.

Zoltan.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------