From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH] attr: map builtin userdiff drivers to well-known extensions Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:05:27 +0100 Message-ID: <4EEBC0A7.3030303@kdbg.org> References: <20111216110000.GA15676@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4EEB4F13.2010402@viscovery.net> <20111216192104.GA19924@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Brandon Casey To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 16 23:05:42 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RbfuK-0006OF-F9 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:05:36 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964882Ab1LPWFe (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:05:34 -0500 Received: from bsmtp4.bon.at ([195.3.86.186]:17331 "EHLO bsmtp.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964826Ab1LPWFc (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 17:05:32 -0500 Received: from dx.sixt.local (unknown [93.83.142.38]) by bsmtp.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F34CDF84; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:06:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dx.sixt.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id D75DC19F5FA; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 23:05:27 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; de; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111101 SUSE/3.1.16 Thunderbird/3.1.16 In-Reply-To: <20111216192104.GA19924@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 16.12.2011 20:21, schrieb Jeff King: > I'm not clear from what you wrote on whether you were saying it is > simply sub-optimal, or whether on balance it is way worse than the > default funcname matching. I'm saying the latter. Okay, we're talking "only" about hunk headers. But when you are reviewing patches, they are *extremely* useful and a time-saver; when they are wrong or not present, they are exactly the opposite. > So, I'm confused. If you are using this, surely you have "*.c diff=xcpp" > in your attributes file, and my patch has no effect for you, Sure I have. What I didn't say (sorry for that!), but wanted to hint at is that this is to experiment with a pattern in order to ultimately improve the built-in pattern. The topic came up just the other day, and I took Thomas Rast's suggestion to experiment with a simplified pattern: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/186355/focus=186439 But as is, the built-in pattern misses way too many anchor points in C++ code. -- Hannes