AFAICT, all callers of `Merge::to_file_merge()` are already well
prepared for working with executable files. It's called from these
places:
* `local_working_copy.rs`: Materialized conflicts are correctly
updated using `Merge::with_new_file_ids()`.
* `merge_tools/`: Same as above.
* `cmd_cat()`: We already ignore the executable bit when we print
non-conflicted files, so it makes sense to also ignore it for
conflicted files.
* `git_diff_part()`: We print all conflicts with mode "100644" (the
mode for regular files). Maybe it's best to use "100755" for
conflicts that are unambiguously executable, or maybe it's better to
use a fake mode like "000000" for all conflicts. Either way, the
current behavior seems fine.
* `diff_content()`: We use the diff content in various diff
formats. We could add more detail about the executable bits in some
of them, but I think the current output is fine. For example,
instead of our current "Created conflict in my-file", we could say
"Created conflict in executable file my-file" or "Created conflict
in ambiguously executable file my-file". That's getting verbose,
though.
So, I think all we need to do is to make `Merge::to_file_merge()` not
require its inputs to be non-executable.
Closes#1279.
Resolves states are most common and the current format is pretty
verbose. Let's print it as if `Merge` were an enum with `Resolved` and
`Conflicted` variants instead.
`futures::stream::Stream::collect()` requires a collection that
implements `Default` and `Extend`, and I would like to to be able to
collect a stream of trees.
We currently represent the root tree id in a commit by `Merge<TreeId>`
plus a boolean `uses_tree_conflict_format`. It's better to use an enum
for that. That makes it harder to forget to check which type of tree
it is, and it makes it impossible to store a legacy tree with multiple
ids (as we could with `uses_tree_conflict_format=false`,
`root_tree=Merge::new(...)`).
Maybe more importantly, we're also going to want to pass around this
information in most places where we currently pass a single `TreeId`,
and passing two separate values would be annoying.
`itertools::interleave()` does exactly what we want for
`Merge::iter()`. I had just not thought to look for it
before. Hopefully it's not noticeably slow.
An alternative name for it would be `arity()`, but `num_sides()`
probably more clearly says that it's not about the number of removes
or the total number of terms.
If we're going to be able to replace most instances of `Tree` by
`MergedTree`, we'll need to be able to diff two `MergedTree`s. This
implements support for that. The implementation copies a lot from the
diff iterator we have for `Tree`. I suspect we should be able to reuse
some of the code by introducing some traits that can then be
implemented by both `Tree` and `MergedTree`. I've left a TODO about
that.
Implementing `Iterator` and `FromIterator` on `Merge<T>` provides much
more flexibility than the current `map()`, `try_map()`, etc.
`Merge::from_iter()` wouldn't have a way of failing if it's given an
unexpected (even) number of items. I would be fine with having it
panic, but we can't even usefully do that, because
e.g. `Option::from_iter()` will pass us an iterator ends early if the
input interator ends early. For example,
`Merge::resolved(None).iter().collect()` would call
`Merge::from_iter()` with an empty iterator (first item `None`). So, I
instead created a `MergeBuilder` type implementing `FromIterator`, and
let `MergeBuilder::build()` panic if there were an even number of
items.
I re-implemented some existing `Merge` methods using the new
facilities in this commit. Maybe we should remove some of the methods.
Since `update_from_contents()` only works with file contents and not
the executable or other kinds of paths, I think it makes more sense
for it to deal with `FileId`s instead of `TreeValue`s.
I think I moved way too many functions onto `Merge<Option<TreeValue>>`
in 82883e648d. This effectively reverts almost all of that
commit. The `Merge<T>` type is simple container and it seems like it
should be at fairly low level in the dependency graph. By moving
functions off of it, we can get rid of the back-depdencies from the
`merge` module to the `conflict` module that I introduced when I moved
`Merge` to the `merge` module. I'm thinking the `conflict` module can
focus on materialized conflicts.
This changes the behavior in one of the cases ilyagr@
[mentioned](https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/pull/1610#discussion_r1199823932)
to match his suggestion. After some more thinking while working on
tree-level conflicts, I now think it's clear that the added `+C-C`
terms should have no effect on the result. A very similar argument is
that `Conflict::simplify()` should not change the result of
`trivial_merge()`. I'll add tests for that next.
I don't know why I made it return an owned value. It seems like an
unnecessary restriction that the value implements `Clone`, so let's
return a reference instead.
We already resolve merge conflicts between hunks, trees, and refs, and
maybe more. They each have their own code for the handling trivial
merges (where the output is equal to one of the inputs). They look
surprisingly different. This commit adds a generic function for doing
that. Curiously, this new implementation uses implements it in yet
another way (basically using a multi-set).
