From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff --check: use colour Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:18:33 -0800 Message-ID: <7vr6tkdnee.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, junkio@cox.net To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 25 00:18:44 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H9rO7-0002EW-He for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 25 Jan 2007 00:18:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932872AbXAXXSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:18:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932874AbXAXXSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:18:35 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:55460 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932872AbXAXXSf (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:18:35 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20070124231834.LPZN19398.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:18:34 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id FBJs1W00e1kojtg0000000; Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:18:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 24 Jan 2007 15:05:48 +0100 (CET)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > Reuse the colour handling of the regular diff. Johannes Schindelin writes: > Reuse the colour handling of the regular diff. > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin > --- > > Is it possible that diff_get_color() _never_ returns NULL? > Then diff.c can be further cleaned up... Does anybody actually use "diff --check"? We could lose more code by removing the option altogether ;-) Seriously, this option needs to be documented. Volunteers?