Re: Threading bug due to a duplicated reference

[TAKAHASHI Tamotsu <ttakah@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

* Tue Jul 26 2005 Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx>
> On 2005-07-25 09:32:25 +0900, TAKAHASHI Tamotsu wrote:
> > I don't object to you, but I want to know your idea about this:
> > Well, my rm_dupref patch removes the _older_ one of duplicated refs.
> > For example, mine makes a tree "a->b->c->b->d" to be "a->c->b->d".
> 
> I don't understand what you mean. Could you give the DAG?

Well, okay (though I don't know what DAG stands for :)

----------------------
[B] Message-ID: <b@b>
[C] Message-ID: <c@c>
    In-Reply-To: <b@b>
[D] References: <b@b> <c@c> <b@b>
----------------------

There are two ways to interpret D's refs header avoiding
a loop or dupe.

----------------------
References: <c@c> <b@b>
B
|->C
`->D (son of B)
----------------------

and

----------------------
References: <b@b> <c@c>
B
`->C
   `->D (son of C)
----------------------

Both my (rm_dupref) patch and TLR's (s/break/continue/) patch
implement the former.


Thanks for trying to decrypt my broken English. ;)
-- 
tamo