When scrolling a lazy-loaded view (a diff in the main view, the command
log, etc.), we top up the view's line buffer by reading more lines from
the still-running task. This was driven by asking the task to read a
fixed number of *additional* lines on every scroll event, which had two
problems:
- It was decoupled from the scroll position. Scrolling down, back up,
and down again re-read lines that had already been read, so the buffer
crept towards the end of the input regardless of where the user
actually scrolled.
- A single wheel notch only bought a single notch worth of runway, so
fast scrolling constantly outran the reader and had to wait for the
next read (and re-render) on every notch.
Make ReadLines take an absolute target total instead of a delta: the
task tracks how many lines it has read and only reads the shortfall, so
requests are idempotent. Callers now ask to fill the viewport at the
current scroll position plus a few screenfuls of read-ahead, which gives
scrolling enough runway to stay smooth.
The four call sites all wanted the same "fill this view" computation, so
consolidate them into a single ReadLinesToFillView helper.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
A commits refresh does its git work on a worker and then reads the model,
the contexts, and the modes for that work directly from there:
LocalCommits.GetSelectionRangeAndMode/GetLimitCommits/GetShowWholeGitGraph,
Model.Commits/MainBranches/HashPool, the filtering path/author. Those are
owned by the UI thread, which is concurrently running the cursor and render
code, so the reads race it — the dominant, confirmed source of the
commits-scope flakes (the startup ClampSelection vs GetSelectionRangeAndMode
race, for one).
Gather them into an immutable capturedCommitState on the UI thread, before
the git work is dispatched, and have refreshCommitsWithLimit compute from
that snapshot. UI-thread callers capture inline; worker callers can't (a
SYNC/BLOCK_UI refresh parks the UI thread at wg.Wait, so hopping from a
scope sub-worker would deadlock), so the capture is lifted out of the scope
worker into the refresh orchestration, and worker callers announce
themselves with a new RefreshFromWorker entry point that hops the capture to
the UI thread and blocks for it (OnUIThreadAndWait). BLOCK_UI runs the whole
refresh on the UI thread regardless of the caller, so it captures inline
too.
Every refresh issued from a worker that reaches the commits (or branches,
which pulls in commits) scope is converted: the fast-forward, branch/tag
delete, worktree remove/detach, push, reword-via-rebase, author edits,
custom-command, hard-reset-with-autostash, reset-to-ref, fetch-and-checkout,
gpg-stream, post-fetch, and external-change-poller refreshes, plus the
branch checkout and move-commits-to-new-branch refreshes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Repo-switch safety needs to answer, synchronously on the UI thread,
"is any foreground work in flight right now?" so it can refuse a switch
that would run against a repo about to be swapped out. gocui already
tracks a task per OnWorker/Update for the test idle-listener; extend
that.
Tasks gain a background flag: background tasks (the ongoing routines
like auto-fetch, and the refreshes they trigger) don't count towards
busy, because their model writes are already guarded against a
concurrent switch by the repo generation. Add OnWorkerBackground,
UpdateBackground and UpdateContentOnlyBackground (plus the gui-layer
OnUIThreadBackground / OnUIThreadContentOnlyBackground / OnWorkerBackground
on IGuiCommon) so the few background call sites can opt in without
touching the hundreds of foreground callers.
TaskManager.hasBusyForegroundTaskExcept answers the query; Gui.Busy()
wraps it, excluding the event currently being processed (recorded as
currentTask) so a handler asking the question doesn't count itself.
Nothing gates on Busy() yet; this is the mechanism only.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Several commands (rewording or amending an earlier commit, custom patch
operations, etc.) are implemented by starting an interactive rebase that stops
at a commit, amending it, and continuing. When no conflict occurs, the user
isn't meant to notice a rebase happened at all.
But a background file refresh can fire while the rebase is mid-flight and render
a dirty working copy of whatever the behind-the-scenes rebase is doing (e.g.
applying a custom patch).
To fix this, we pause the background routines for the duration of any
waiting-status operation — exactly the window in which lazygit is driving the
git operation itself and will refresh once at the end. The boundary is also
right for the conflict case: when a rebase stops on a conflict the operation
returns, the pause releases, and background refreshes resume for the interactive
resolution that follows.
I copied all files except dot files (.github and .gitignore), the _examples
folder, and go.mod/go.sum.
At some point we may want to copy the files back to the gocui repo when other
clients (e.g. lazydocker) want to use the newer versions of them.
Refresh is one of those functions that shouldn't require error handling (similar
to triggering a redraw of the UI, see
https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/issues/3887).
As far as I see, the only reason why Refresh can currently return an error is
that the Then function returns one. The actual refresh errors, e.g. from the git
calls that are made to fetch data, are already logged and swallowed. Most of the
Then functions do only UI stuff such as selecting a list item, and always return
nil; there's only one that can return an error (updating the rebase todo file in
LocalCommitsController.startInteractiveRebaseWithEdit); it's not a critical
error if this fails, it is only used for setting rebase todo items to "edit"
when you start an interactive rebase by pressing 'e' on a range selection of
commits. We simply log this error instead of returning it.
Instead, pass the entire Mutexes struct by pointer to controllers.
This is better because Mutexes now has a zero value and doesn't need to be
initialized.
This solves several problems that arise from opening a menu while the prompt is
open. We might try to solve these in a different way, e.g. by dismissing the
search prompt before opening a menu, but restricting what you can do while the
prompt is open seems like the more robust fix.
To achieve this, we
- call resetKeyBindings both when opening and when closing the search/filter
prompt
- change the keybindings to only contain the ones for the search prompt when
that context is active.
Probably not the most import feature in the world, but when resizing the
terminal window while multiple popup panels were open at the same time, we would
only resize the topmost one.
The main reason for changing this is because it makes the next commit easier to
implement.
This is important when using a pager that draws a horizontal line across the
entire width of the view; when changing from a file or directory that has only
unstaged (or only staged) changes to one that has both, the main view is split
in half, but the PTY task would be run on the view in its old state, so the
horizonal line would be too long and wrap around.
This lets us get rid of a few more calls to Error(), and it simplifies things
for clients of OnWorker: they can simply return an error from their callback
like we do everywhere else.
Very similar to WithWaitingStatus, except that the status is shown in a view
next to the affected item, rather than in the status bar.
Not used by anything yet; again, committing separately to get smaller commits.
The true issue was that we were focusing the line in the view before it gets resized in the layout function.
This meant if the view was squashed in accordion mode, the view wouldn't know how to set the cursor/origin to
focus the line.
Now we've got a queue of 'after layout' functions i.e. functions to call at the end of the layout function,
right before views are drawn.
The only caveat is that we can't have an infinite buffer so we're arbitrarily capping it at 1000 and dropping
functions if we exceed that limit. But that really should never happen.
The global counter approach is easy to understand but it's brittle and depends on implicit behaviour that is not very discoverable.
With a global counter, if any goroutine accidentally decrements the counter twice, we'll think lazygit is idle when it's actually busy.
Likewise if a goroutine accidentally increments the counter twice we'll think lazygit is busy when it's actually idle.
With the new approach we have a map of tasks where each task can either be busy or not. We create a new task and add it to the map
when we spawn a worker goroutine (among other things) and we remove it once the task is done.
The task can also be paused and continued for situations where we switch back and forth between running a program and asking for user
input.
In order for this to work with `git push` (and other commands that require credentials) we need to obtain the task from gocui when
we create the worker goroutine, and then pass it along to the commands package to pause/continue the task as required. This is
MUCH more discoverable than the old approach which just decremented and incremented the global counter from within the commands package,
but it's at the cost of expanding some function signatures (arguably a good thing).
Likewise, whenever you want to call WithWaitingStatus or WithLoaderPanel the callback will now have access to the task for pausing/
continuing. We only need to actually make use of this functionality in a couple of places so it's a high price to pay, but I don't
know if I want to introduce a WithWaitingStatusTask and WithLoaderPanelTask function (open to suggestions).
When we use the one panel for the entire commit message, its tricky to have a keybinding both for adding a newline and submitting.
By having two panels: one for the summary line and one for the description, we allow for 'enter' to submit the message when done from the summary panel,
and 'enter' to add a newline when done from the description panel. Alt-enter, for those who can use that key combo, also works for submitting the message
from the description panel. For those who can't use that key combo, and don't want to remap the keybinding, they can hit tab to go back to the summary panel
and then 'enter' to submit the message.
We have some awkwardness in that both contexts (i.e. panels) need to appear and disappear in tandem and we don't have a great way of handling that concept,
so we just push both contexts one after the other, and likewise remove both contexts when we escape.
