From: Piotr Krukowiecki <piotr.krukowiecki@gmail.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Ian Ward Comfort <icomfort@stanford.edu>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] commit, status: #comment diff output in verbose mode
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:34:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=csBKvpBew9QMbD6UA774K_t6h+O4kK1-qa=FC@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110311012318.GB15377@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 04:45:14PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>>
>> > One reason to keep the existing behavior is that editors will tend to
>> > syntax-highlight the diff portion without much extra effort (in vim, at
>> > least, the syntax highlighting just includes the diff syntax
>> > highlighting for that section).
>>
>> Hmm, thanks for pointing it out; it indeed is a valid concern.
>>
>> Although I usually strongly resist changes in order to keep the user
>> experience stable, I didn't think about this one, as I don't let the
>> editor syntax highlight anything.
/me too - I find syntax highlighting a nice feature and would prefer it to
stay as it is over using #commented out diff
> I like the proposal for:
>
> # Lines below this one will be removed.
> diff --git ...
>
> which seems to have the best of both worlds, robust and easy for editors
> to recognize as a diff. For that matter, we could also do "# Lines below
> this one..." for _all_ of the git-status template, but I don't think
> it's necessary. Those lines are already clearly marked with a delimiter,
> and I don't think anybody is complaining about them
The advantage of using such line is that it's more unique - IMO it's less likely
someone writes a commit message with "# Lines below ..." etc then with
"diff --git".
It also makes possible to remove this line and thus include git diff output in
commit message.
The downside is probably the need to support i18n for "# Lines below ..."
Less magic formats (or formats less magic) is better IMO.
--
Piotr Krukowiecki
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-13 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-10 19:59 [PATCH v2] commit, status: #comment diff output in verbose mode Ian Ward Comfort
2011-03-10 22:52 ` Jeff King
2011-03-10 23:57 ` SZEDER Gábor
2011-03-11 0:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-03-11 1:23 ` Jeff King
2011-03-11 5:31 ` Jeff King
2011-03-11 8:49 ` Michael J Gruber
2011-03-17 7:37 ` Jeff King
2011-03-17 8:01 ` Michael J Gruber
2011-03-17 19:41 ` Jeff King
2011-03-13 18:34 ` Piotr Krukowiecki [this message]
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='AANLkTi=csBKvpBew9QMbD6UA774K_t6h+O4kK1-qa=FC@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=piotr.krukowiecki@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=icomfort@stanford.edu \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).