Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in monotone lca

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 03:37:38PM +0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
> However in that case lcad has a bug :-)

Err, yep, sounds like it.  Sigh.

> I have database with this example (artifically constructed).

I guess I should ask if you could turn it into an automated test case?
Though part of me would rather just get on with throwing out lcad...

> >> P.S.:  As a stopgap measure, I still think my proposal of a week
> >> ago is better :-)
> >
> > Indeed, it looked quite interesting and plausible; I've been meaning
> > to respond, but it takes some effort to wrap my head back around what
> > sort of properties are needed and figure out whether I really believe
> > your suggestion handles all the bad cases...
> 
> Ah, I don't think it will handle all the bad cases,
> I just thought it was better than lcad. 
> But I can be persuaded otherwise :-)

Ah, well, sure, nothing can handle all the bad cases :-).  I guess I
meant "no more unsafe than LCAD" when it comes to declaring something
a clean merge.

> And as suggested in another thread, it really depends on the
> development model you choose.
> 
> At the moment I am trying to wrap my head around the merging problem as 
> well.  It is rather tricky and just creating a mathematical vocabulary
> is already quite challenging.  I am writing everything down and 
> when it comes to a stage that I can draw some conclusions and can
> be understood by more people than just me I will publish it.

Yep.  You _are_ familiar with the precise cdv-merge work that Bram
(and I, and others) have done?

-- Nathaniel

-- 
"Lull'd in the countless chambers of the brain,
Our thoughts are link'd by many a hidden chain:
Awake but one, and lo! what myriads rise!
Each stamps its image as the other flies"
  -- Ann Ward Radcliffe, The Mysteries of Udolpho

This email may be read aloud.