mq: report correct numbers for changing "number of guarded, applied patches" Before this patch, "hg qselect" may report incorrect numbers for "number of guarded, applied patches has changed", because it examines "pushable" of patches by the index not in "the series" but in "applied patches", even though "mq.pushable()" expects the former. To report correct numbers for changing "number of guarded, applied patches", this patch uses the name of applied patch to examine pushable-ness of it. This patch also changes the result of existing "hg qselect" tests, because they doesn't change pushable-ness of already applied patches. This patch assumes that "hg qselect" focuses on changing pushable-ness only of already applied patches, because: - the report message uses not "previous" (in the series) but "applied" - the logic to pop patches for --pop/--reapply examines pushable-ness only of already applied ones (in fact, there are some incorrect code paths)

annotate: remove redundant check for empty list of annotation data It isn't necessary because zip(*pieces) returns [] if pieces are empty, and pieces are empty only if lines are empty.

revset: lower weight for _intlist function The histedit command uses a revset like: (_intlist('1234\x001235')) and merge() Previously the optimizer gave a weight of 1.5 to the _intlist side (1 for the function, 0.5 for the string) which caused it to process the merge() side first. This caused it to evaluate merge against every commit in the repo, which took 2.5 seconds on a large repo. I changed the weight of _intlist to 0, since it's a trivial calculation, which makes it process intlist first, which makes merge apply only to the revs in the list. Which makes the revset take 0.15 seconds now. Cutting off 2.4 seconds off our histedit performance. >From the revset benchmark: revset #25: (_intlist('20000\x0020001')) and merge() 0) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.036767 comb 0.040000 user 0.040000 sys 0.000000 (best of 100) 1) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.000198 comb 0.000000 user 0.000000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9084)

revset: make parents() O(number of parents) Strip executes a revset like this: max(parents(_intlist('1234\x001235')) - _intlist('1234\x001235')) Previously the parents() revset would do 'subset & parents' which iterates over each item in the subset and checks if it's in parents. subset is usually the entire repo (a spanset) so this takes a while. Reversing the parameters to be 'parents & subset' means the operation becomes O(number of parents) instead of O(size of repo). It also means the result gets evaluated immediately (since parents isn't a lazy set), but I think this is a win in most scenarios. This shaves 0.3 seconds off strip (amend/histedit/rebase/etc) for large repositories. revset #0: parents(20000) 0) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.006256 comb 0.010000 user 0.010000 sys 0.000000 (best of 289) 1) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.000391 comb 0.000000 user 0.000000 sys 0.000000 (best of 4323)

revset: make descendants() lazier Previously descendants() would force the provided subset to become a set. In the case of revsets like '(%ld::) - (%ld)' (as used by histedit) this would force the '- (%ld)' set to be evaluated, which produced a set containing every commit in the repo (except %ld). This takes 0.6s on large repos. This changes descendants to trust the subset to implement __contains__ efficiently, which improves the above revset to 0.16s. Shaving 0.4 seconds off of histedit. revset #27: (20000::) - (20000) 0) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.023640 comb 0.020000 user 0.020000 sys 0.000000 (best of 100) 1) obsolete feature not enabled but 54243 markers found! ! wall 0.019589 comb 0.020000 user 0.020000 sys 0.000000 (best of 100) This commit removes the final revset related perf hotspot from histedit. Combined with the previous two patches, they shave a little over 3 seconds off histedit on large repos.

check-code: look for misuse of __bool__