3 ms·
I wonder if, someday, it might be practical to integrate the "micro history" of a change into the overall version control system's understanding of the "macro h
by redler 14y ago
I wonder if, someday, it might be practical to integrate the "micro history" of a change into the overall version control system's understanding of the "macro history". I'm thinking of something like an intelligently-condensed version of the kind of change-replay you see by rolling forward or back through an editor's undo buffer. A system like git would still work the same way, but with this new extra blob of detailed metadata associated with the specific commit.
Fractal Designs Painter (now Corel Painter), back in the day, used to have a feature where the entire creation and edit history of a "painting" could be captured and replayed in full detail, right down to the level of the brush angle and pressure used by the artist with every stroke. This was useful for creating art at low resolution, then re-creating the piece automatically (and much more slowly) at high resolution. Corel's version may still have this feature; I haven't used it in years. But if it was practical ten years ago in manipulating multi-hundred-megabyte files, certainly it would be possible now, for what are usually plain text files.
Instead of just doing a diff or git bisect, imagine being able to load up the commit of a file with one of those ambiguous changes, grab a slider (or your favorite keyboard equivalents), and scrub back and forth through a condensed replay of someone else's actual changes exactly as they were keyed.
I'm not sure this would always be a good thing (a form of surveillance?), but it would certainly be useful when the original author of the code is unavailable.