Closes#60424
## Problem
With the repro from #60424, staging the first deletion hunk marked the
second deletion as staged in the UI even though git still had it
unstaged, and clicking the (incorrectly shown) Unstage button inserted a
duplicate copy of the hunk's contents into the git index on every click.
The root cause is ambiguous hunk placement. The committed text contains
repeated `end\n\n` line runs, so the deletion hunks can "slide": more
than one placement produces a minimal diff. The uncommitted diff (HEAD
vs worktree) anchored the remaining deletion at one row while the
unstaged diff (index vs worktree), recomputed after the partial stage,
anchored the same logical deletion at a different row. Everything that
correlates hunks across those two diffs assumes they agree on positions:
- the secondary-status matching in `hunks_intersecting_range_impl` found
no unstaged hunk at the uncommitted hunk's rows and reported it as
staged (`NoSecondaryHunk`);
- the worktree→index projection in `compute_uncommitted_index_edits`
treated the hunk's position as unchanged text and, on unstage, inserted
the hunk's HEAD content at an index position that already contained it,
duplicating it on every request.
## Fix
Upgrade `imara-diff` from 0.1.8 to 0.2.0 and run
`Diff::postprocess_lines` (imara-diff's port of git's xdiff
slider/indent heuristic) after computing hunks in `buffer_diff`. This
canonicalizes the placement of ambiguous hunks based only on their local
content, so diffs of the same buffer against different base texts anchor
the same logical change at the same rows. A bonus is that Zed's hunk
placement now matches `git diff`'s output for such cases (git has used
the indent heuristic by default since 2.11).
As defense in depth, `compute_uncommitted_index_edits` now drops a
pure-insertion index edit whose content is already present at the target
position, so a stale secondary status can no longer duplicate index
content.
The imara-diff 0.2 API removed the `Sink` trait and the top-level
`diff()` function, so the other call sites (`language/text_diff.rs`,
`zeta_prompt/udiff.rs`, `edit_prediction_metrics/reversal.rs`) are
migrated mechanically to `Diff::compute` + `hunks()` with unchanged
behavior (0.2 also renamed `lines_with_terminator` to `lines` and
changed the default `&str` tokenization to include terminators; the
unified-diff builders keep terminator-less tokens via `str::lines()`).
## Testing
- New regression test `test_staging_hunks_with_ambiguous_placement`
replays the exact repro from #60424 (same file contents): stages the
first deletion, asserts the remaining hunks keep their unstaged status
and the index matches exactly, then issues repeated unstage requests for
the unstaged hunk and asserts the index is unchanged. Before the fix
this test showed the second hunk flipping to staged and the index
growing by one copy of the deleted block per unstage request.
- `buffer_diff`, `language`, `zeta_prompt`, `edit_prediction_metrics`,
`multi_buffer`, `git_ui`, `editor`, and the `project` integration suite
pass.
- One test expectation updated: `editor::test_fold_function_bodies`
asserted the old placement of an ambiguous deletion (blank line before
comment); the canonicalized placement (comment before blank line)
matches what `git diff` produces for the same texts.
Release Notes:
- Fixed staging a hunk sometimes marking a different hunk as staged (and
subsequent unstaging corrupting the git index) when the diff contained
repeated lines
([#60424](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/60424)).
---------
Co-authored-by: Cole Miller <cole@zed.dev>
# Objective
Part of EP-10
Closes EP-118
- Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses.
- If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as
[described in the GitHub
docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword).
## Solution
- Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how?
- Are there any parts that need more testing?
- How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything
specific they need to know?
- If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are
there any important ones you can't test?
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
## Showcase
> This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change
or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section.
- Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your
awesome work!
- If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot,
GIF, or video
- A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing
features!
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a
toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
<details>
<summary>Click to view showcase</summary>
My super cool demos here
</details>
---
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
Co-authored-by: Nbarry <nbarry@zed.dev>
# Objective
Closes EP-9
- Describe the objective or issue this PR addresses.
- If you're fixing a specific issue, use "Fixes #X" for each issue as
[described in the GitHub
docs](https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword).
## Solution
- Describe the solution used to achieve the objective above.
## Testing
- Did you test these changes? If so, how?
- Are there any parts that need more testing?
- How can other people (reviewers) test your changes? Is there anything
specific they need to know?
- If relevant, what platforms did you test these changes on, and are
there any important ones you can't test?
## Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content adheres to Zed's UI standards
([UX/UI](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
and
[icon](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/crates/icons/README.md)
guidelines)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
## Showcase
> This section is optional. If this PR does not include a visual change
or does not add a new user-facing feature, you can delete this section.
- Help others understand the result of this PR by showcasing your
awesome work!
- If this PR includes a visual change, consider adding a screenshot,
GIF, or video
- A before/after comparison is very useful for changes to existing
features!
While a showcase should aim to be brief and digestible, you can use a
toggleable section to save space on longer showcases:
<details>
<summary>Click to view showcase</summary>
My super cool demos here
</details>
---
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
---------
Co-authored-by: Oleksiy Syvokon <oleksiy.syvokon@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Oleksiy Syvokon <oleksiy@zed.dev>
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
- Track average size of the retrieved context
- Support comma-separated values for `ep context --type`
- Exclude oracle from `editable` preset
Release Notes:
- N/A
This change adds metrics for evaluating editable context collectors and
the collectors themselves:
- `cursor excerpt`: small area around the cursor.
- `current-file`: the full file that contains the cursor.
- `edit-history`: excerpts around edit history edits.
- `edit-history-file`: full files referenced by the edit history.
- `git-log`: files related to the cursor file according to recent git
co-change history.
- `oracle-file`: full files referenced by the expected patches. This is
an oracle/evaluation-only source because it uses the target patch.
Individual collectors can be enabled by passing a comma-separated list
like this: `ep context --type=edit-history,current-file`. There's also a
preset, `--type=editable`, which will enable all collectors except
oracle.
This change also adds the
`.prompt_input.related_files[0].excerpts[0].context_source` field.
Editable context is only accessible via ep-cli for now.
Release Notes:
- N/A
---------
Co-authored-by: Eric Holk <eric@zed.dev>
Needed for use in cloud
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
This change contains a number of fixes to make kept_rate more intuitive.
It also adds a CLI utility to print debug info on how the metric is
computed.
Release Notes:
- N/A
Reversal tracking tests were removed in
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/pull/53912. This PR re-adds them
Self-Review Checklist:
- [x] I've reviewed my own diff for quality, security, and reliability
- [x] Unsafe blocks (if any) have justifying comments
- [x] The content is consistent with the [UI/UX
checklist](https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#uiux-checklist)
- [x] Tests cover the new/changed behavior
- [x] Performance impact has been considered and is acceptable
Closes #ISSUE
Release Notes:
- N/A or Added/Fixed/Improved ...
