From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: git diff woes Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:40:40 +0100 Message-ID: <473954F8.8070908@op5.se> References: <4738208D.1080003@op5.se> <47382C84.50408@op5.se> <7vhcjr2lte.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <4738E9E6.2040001@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , Johannes Schindelin , Git Mailing List To: Miles Bader X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 13 08:41:06 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IrqOK-0002tB-Sp for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:41:01 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750912AbXKMHkp (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:40:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750909AbXKMHkp (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:40:45 -0500 Received: from mail.op5.se ([193.201.96.20]:58907 "EHLO mail.op5.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750847AbXKMHko (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:40:44 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2DC41F0875A; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:40:42 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.499 tagged_above=-10 required=6.6 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.op5.se ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.op5.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ExcKhcT3jFkP; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:40:42 +0100 (CET) Received: from nox.op5.se (unknown [192.168.1.20]) by mail.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE3A1F08758; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 08:40:41 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Miles Bader wrote: > Andreas Ericsson writes: >> I notice it, and I don't like it. I guess I'm just used to git being >> smarter than their GNU tool equivalents, especially since it only ever >> applies patches in full. > > It's not at all obvious that this behavior is actually wrong -- it seems > perfectly reasonable to use either old or new text for the hunk headers. > Right, which is why I've made it configurable. > It hardly matters really, since that particular output is just "useful > noise" to provide a bit of helpful context for human readers, and humans > (unlike programs) are notoriously good at not being bothered by such > things. Er, well most humans anyway. > I wouldn't have reacted either, except that this time someone asked me to review a branch early in the morning because he had introduced a bug in the process, and the hunk header information made me assume the wrong hunk of the patch was the culprit. On the one hand, it wouldn't have been so much of a problem if the developer in question would have followed my suggestion of committing small and making sure the commit message describes everything that's done. On the other hand, a tool fooling a human isn't a good thing either, even if said human is not really in shape for using said tool. Granted, the new form can still fool people, but for archeology excursions I think it's definitely right to use the "new" funcname in the hunk header. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231