This is a remainder of the previous refactoring series. into_template() could be
implemented as a non-extension method, which allows us to get rid of .clone()
from Literal property extraction. However, there wasn't measurable difference.
Let's not try to overly optimize things. It's probably simpler to switch to
Rc<str> if .clone() really matters.
This is instead of https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/pull/3292, which would make
`diffedit3` built into `jj`. I still have some hope of eventually making
`diffedit3` into the default diff editor that is available without any
configuration, which probably requires building it into `jj`, but this may not
happen, and it wouldn't hurt to test `diffedit3` first. Some examples of
concerns (see also the discussion in that PR):
- It is only a guess on my part that this would make a good default. The editor
might not be polished enough, and most users are not used to 3-pane diff
editing. I think most users would like it if they tried it, but this might be
plain wrong.
- There are concerns about adding a heavyweight dependency on `jj`. While I
tried to make it as lightweight as possible, it still unavoidably includes a web
server.
- There may be ways to bundle `diffedit3` with `jj` without combining them in a
single binary.
`RewriteType::Rewritten` must have exactly one replacement. I think
it's better to encode that in the type by attaching the value to the
enum variant. I also renamed the type to just `Rewrite` since it now
has attached data and `Type` sounds like a traditional data-free enum
to me.
Looks like I forgot this in some recent refactoring.
I don't really see any harm in making the type public later. I might
want to make `rebase_descendants()` not clear `parent_mapping` and
instead provide a way of accessing it afterwards (removing the need
for the `_return_map()` flavors). We'll see if that ends up
happening. For now it can be private anyway.
For example,
```
<<<<<<< Conflict 1 of 3
+++++++ Contents of side #1
left 3.1
left 3.2
left 3.3
%%%%%%% Changes from base to side #2
-line 3
+right 3.1
>>>>>>>
```
or
```
<<<<<<< Conflict 1 of 1
%%%%%%% Changes from base to side #1
-line 3
+right 3.1
+++++++ Contents of side #2
left 3.1
left 3.2
left 3.3
>>>>>>>
```
Currently, there is no way to disable these, this is TODO for a future
PR. Other TODOs for future PRs: make these labels configurable. After
that, we could support a `diff3/git`-like conflict format as well, in
principle.
Counting conflicts helps with knowing whether you fixed all the
conflicts while you are in the editor.
While labeling "side #1", etc, does not tell you the commit id or
description as requested in #1176, I still think it's an improvement.
Most importantly, I hope this will make `jj`'s conflict format less
scary-looking for new users.
I've used this for a bit, and I like it. Without the labels, I would see
that the two conflicts have a different order of conflict markers, but I
wouldn't be able to remember what that means. For longer diffs, it can
be tricky for me to quickly tell that it's a diff as opposed to one of
the sides. This also creates some hope of being able to navigate a
conflict with more than 2 sides.
Another not-so-secret goal for this is explained in
https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/pull/3109#issuecomment-2014140627. The
idea is a little weird, but I *think* it could be helpful, and I'd like
to experiment with it.
The format is 7 characters of the separator followed by a space and arbitrary
text, followed by a newline. Separator followed by a newline is also allowed.
E.g.:
<<<<<<< Random text
%%%%%%% Random text
line 2
-line 3
+left
line 4
+++++++ Random text
right
%%%%%%% Random text
line 2
+forward
line 3
line 4
>>>>>>> Random text
This commit only allows reading such conflicts.
I considered allowing longer separators (`<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Random text`), but we
wouldn't currently write them, so let's be strict for now.
7 characters if they are followed by a space and arbitrary text
I've heard of one instance of a person being confused by the error.
Previously, the error was:
```
Error: Failed to load tool configuration
Caused by: To use `diffedit3` as a merge tool, the config `merge-tools.diffedit3.merge-args` must be defined (see docs for details)
```
Now, it is:
```
Error: The tool `diffedit3` cannot be used as a merge tool with `jj resolve`.
Hint: To use `diffedit3` as a merge tool, the config `merge-tools.diffedit3.merge-args` must be defined (see docs for details)
```
TODO for future PR: allow setting `merge-tools.TOOL.edit-args = false` so that
attempting to use TOOL as a diff editor fails. This would be helpful, for
example, for the `vscode` tool.
I wanted to have a reference point for the built-in revsets,
but `jj config get revsets.log` doesn't turn anything up since
it has special handling for the legacy config key
`ui.default-revset`. So I had to dig into the source code of jj
to get it.
I think it might help others to be able to reason about revsets
to have the log default shown in the settings documentation.
I considered adding RefTarget template type, but some of the methods naturally
fit to RefName. For example, a conflicted branch name is decorated as "??", so
it makes sense to add branch.conflict() instead of branch.target().conflict().
I'm not pretty sure how many RefName methods we'll need to add to port the
current branch listing, but there will be .tracked(), .tracking_local_present(),
.ahead_by(), and .behind_by().
I'm going to add more detailed output there. This is a step towards "branch
list" template. "tag list -T" wouldn't be that useful, but it shares primitives
with "branch list -T".
I'm going to add ref_name.target*() template methods so the commit templater
can be reused for branches/tags templates. RefTarget could be looked up by
(name, kind) pair, but it's simpler to store it in RefName.
Thanks to everyone who's contributed!
Unlike previous releases, I went through the changelog entries and
reorganized them a bit.
We didn't have anything under "Deprecations" this time, but I moved
the heading after "Breaking changes" for next release. I think
breaking changes are more important because deprecations are just
about giving a heads up before it actually breaks.
