-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Snapshot diff merge operations #142
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8fb8cb2
Added beginnings of custom diff merger
Shillaker e0901f2
Add merge strategies
Shillaker 1d90877
Added logic for handling merge regions
Shillaker 267b067
Added tests for snapshot merge operations
Shillaker de3eb86
Add locking
Shillaker 45ae416
Tests for client/ server snapshot merge ops
Shillaker e16365a
Extensible test
Shillaker 72b6dfc
Tidying up tests as they are
Shillaker 0f1f16f
More detailed tests for server
Shillaker 318b94c
Fix out by one and missing break
Shillaker e951877
Tests for invalid merges
Shillaker d1975e8
Add test for edge cases of snapshots
Shillaker File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Again, I think that
offset + length
should point to the first byte after the region, and then thefor
increment would skip one byte.A test that would check this would consist of two consecutive regions with
int
s that need to be added. If I am not mistaken that test should now fail.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, great spot on both of these comments. There was an off-by-one error that meant that the second of two adjacent merge regions would be lost if both had changed. Have added the relevant
-1
s and a test.