From: Tim Chase <git@tim.thechases.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: misleading diff-hunk header
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 19:41:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50381F52.9030007@tim.thechases.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120824164415.GA23262@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 08/24/12 11:44, Jeff King wrote:
> With the old code, you'd get:
>
> diff --git a/old b/new
> index f384549..1066a25 100644
> --- a/old
> +++ b/new
> @@ -2,3 +2,3 @@ one
> two
> -three
> +three -- modified
> four
>
> So the hunk header is showing you something useful; the element just
> above your context. But with my patch, you'd see:
>
> diff --git a/old b/new
> index f384549..1066a25 100644
> --- a/old
> +++ b/new
> @@ -2,3 +2,3 @@ two
> two
> -three
> +three -- modified
> four
>
> I.e., it shows the element just before the change, which is already in
> the context anyway. So it's actually less useful. Although note that the
> current behavior is not all that useful, either; it is not really giving
> you any information about the change, but rather just showing one extra
> line of context.
>
> So I would say that which you would prefer might depend on exactly what
> you are diffing. But I would also argue that in any case where the new
> code produces a worse result, the hunk header was not all that useful to
> begin with.
If the documented purpose of "diff -p" (and by proxy
diff.{type}.xfuncname) is to show the name of the *function*
containing the changed lines, and all you have is a list of lines
with no function names, it's pretty arbitrary to call either
behavior "worse". :-)
-tkc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-25 0:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-21 12:57 misleading diff-hunk header Tim Chase
2012-08-21 15:22 ` Thomas Rast
2012-08-21 15:42 ` Tim Chase
2012-08-21 17:39 ` Johannes Sixt
2012-08-21 22:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-21 17:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-24 14:29 ` Jeff King
2012-08-24 15:05 ` Tim Chase
2012-08-24 16:44 ` Jeff King
2012-08-25 0:41 ` Tim Chase [this message]
2012-08-25 4:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-25 12:56 ` Tim Chase
2012-08-26 10:43 ` Stefano Lattarini
2012-08-26 18:53 ` Junio C Hamano
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-08-21 13:21 Tim Chase
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50381F52.9030007@tim.thechases.com \
--to=git@tim.thechases.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.