RE: [stellation-res] Text merge test case

["Jonathan Gossage" <jgossage@xxxxxxxx>]

> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >[mailto:stellation-res-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mark C.
> >Chu-Carroll
> >Sent: October 26, 2002 10:12 AM
> >To: stellation-res@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: [stellation-res] Text merge test case
> >
> >
> >On Sat, 2002-10-26 at 21:37, Jonathan Gossage wrote:
> >> I am finding many instances where conflicts should be
> >generated and are not.
> >> This is worrisome because if a SCM is going to err it should
> >be on the side
> >> of reporting spurious conflicts, rather than silently making mistakes.
> >
> >Definitely send them to me. What I've seen so far look like
> >edge-case bugs - that is, not fundamental problems with the
> >algorithm, but silly errors in the implementation dealing
> >with cases that didn't come up in our use of the system. (I've found
> >three different problems triggered by off-by-ones in trailing segments
> >where the trailing segments were one line long. They work if the
> >trailing segment is longer. The
> >case you sent me earlier was a case where the code assumed
> >there'd be at least one common LCS segment. Definitely bugs,
> >but bugs in the form of my stupidity in not being careful
> >enough to make sure the code covered all possibilities.)
> >
> >I believe the merge algorithm is sound. Hopefully, the
> >cases your seeing are either more of these edge-case
> >type problems, or they're differences in behavior between
> >merge algebra type merges and delta-transformer merges.
> >(There are cases where CVS would call a conflict, and
> >an algebraic merge would find a valid resolution.)
> >
> >Of course, if there is a fundamental error in our merge, I'd rather know
> >it now than later.
> >
> >	-Mark
> >
> >--

Try these three then.


:test13
# Base sequence     Delta Sequence    Target Sequence   Result Sequence
  abc               abc               xyz               abc
  def               def               xyz               def
  def               def               xyz               def
  ghi               ghi               xyz               ghi
  abc               abc               xyz               abc
  def               def               xyz               def
  ghi               ghi               xyz               ghi

I believe that line 1 should report a conflict since delta and target both
differ from base.


:test16
# Base sequence     Delta Sequence    Target Sequence   Result Sequence
  abc               xyz               abc               xyz
  abc               abc               abc               abc
  abc               abc               abc               abc
  xyz               abc               abc               abc
  abc               abc               abc               abc
  abc               abc               abc               abc
  abc               abc               xyz               abc

Should not the last line be xyz?


:test17
# Tests the reversal of the first and last entries in a sequence
# Base sequence     Delta Sequence   Target Sequence   Expected Sequence
  abc               abc              def               def
  def               def              ghi               ghi
  ghi               ghi              jkl               jkl
  jkl               jkl              abc

This is similar to test1 I sent you earlier expect that delta and target
have been swapped.