[PATCH 1 of 2] histedit: extract method ruleeditor

[Augie Fackler]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:48:40AM -0800, Ryan McElroy wrote:
> On 2/17/2015 4:52 PM, Mateusz Kwapich wrote:
> ># HG changeset patch
> ># User Mateusz Kwapich <mitrandir at fb.com>
> ># Date 1421952770 28800
> >#      Thu Jan 22 10:52:50 2015 -0800
> ># Node ID 494a60ee7b222940db7f95c0546ada91d13e180c
> ># Parent  ff5caa8dfd993680d9602ca6ebb14da9de10d5f4
> >histedit: extract method ruleeditor
> >
> >Extract functionality of editing histedit rules to separate method so we can
> >reuse it in upcoming --edit-plan option.
> >
> >diff --git a/hgext/histedit.py b/hgext/histedit.py
> >--- a/hgext/histedit.py
> >+++ b/hgext/histedit.py
> >@@ -638,16 +638,9 @@
> >          ctxs = [repo[r] for r in revs]
> >          if not rules:
> >-            rules = '\n'.join([makedesc(c) for c in ctxs])
> >-            rules += '\n\n'
> >-            rules += editcomment % (node.short(root), node.short(topmost))
> >-            rules = ui.edit(rules, ui.username())
> >-            # Save edit rules in .hg/histedit-last-edit.txt in case
> >-            # the user needs to ask for help after something
> >-            # surprising happens.
> >-            f = open(repo.join('histedit-last-edit.txt'), 'w')
> >-            f.write(rules)
> >-            f.close()
> >+            rules = ruleeditor(repo, ui, [['pick', c] for c in ctxs],
> >+                               editcomment=editcomment % (node.short(root),
> >+                                                          node.short(topmost)))
> >          else:
> >              if rules == '-':
> >                  f = sys.stdin
> >@@ -805,20 +798,40 @@
> >              raise util.Abort(_('cannot edit immutable changeset: %s') % root)
> >      return [c.node() for c in ctxs]
> >-def makedesc(c):
> >-    """build a initial action line for a ctx `c`
> >+def makedesc(repo, action, rev):
> >+    """build a initial action line for a ctx
> >      line are in the form:
> >-      pick <hash> <rev> <summary>
> >+      <action> <hash> <rev> <summary>
> >      """
> >+    ctx = repo[rev]
> >      summary = ''
> >-    if c.description():
> >-        summary = c.description().splitlines()[0]
> >-    line = 'pick %s %d %s' % (c, c.rev(), summary)
> >+    if ctx.description():
> >+        summary = ctx.description().splitlines()[0]
> >+    line = '%s %s %d %s' % (action, ctx, ctx.rev(), summary)
> >      # trim to 80 columns so it's not stupidly wide in my editor
> >      return util.ellipsis(line, 80)
> The simultaneous changes to makedesc make this diff harder to parse. Could
> you split those out into their own change? That will make this be two
> trivial refactors instead of one more difficult refactor.

+1, agree with Ryan's comments enough I'm dropping these and will wait
for a resend.

>
> >+def ruleeditor(repo, ui, rules, editcomment=""):
> >+    """open an editor to edit rules
> >+
> >+    rules are in the format [ [act, ctx], ...] like in state.rules
> >+    """
> >+    rules = '\n'.join([makedesc(repo, act, rev) for [act, rev] in rules])
> >+    rules += '\n\n'
> >+    rules += editcomment
> >+    rules = ui.edit(rules, ui.username())
> >+
> >+    # Save edit rules in .hg/histedit-last-edit.txt in case
> >+    # the user needs to ask for help after something
> >+    # surprising happens.
> >+    f = open(repo.join('histedit-last-edit.txt'), 'w')
> >+    f.write(rules)
> >+    f.close()
> >+
> >+    return rules
> >+
> >  def verifyrules(rules, repo, ctxs):
> >      """Verify that there exists exactly one edit rule per given changeset.
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mercurial-devel mailing list
> >Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> >http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel