From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Davide Libenzi Subject: Re: [RFH] xdiff shows trivially redundant diff. Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:50:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <7v4q1cmj7l.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vzmj3k7x9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4q1bglkp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vbqvictsc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 04 00:51:22 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FQXt3-0000Ys-UI for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:51:07 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964890AbWDCWvD (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 18:51:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964891AbWDCWvC (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 18:51:02 -0400 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([69.30.125.51]:64684 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964890AbWDCWvA (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2006 18:51:00 -0400 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Received: from alien.or.mcafeemobile.com by x35.dev.mdolabs.com with [XMail 1.23 ESMTP Server] id for from ; Mon, 3 Apr 2006 15:50:42 -0700 X-X-Sender: davide@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vbqvictsc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-GPG-FINGRPRINT: CFAE 5BEE FD36 F65E E640 56FE 0974 BF23 270F 474E X-GPG-PUBLIC_KEY: http://www.xmailserver.org/davidel.asc Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Davide Libenzi writes: > >>> For example, the first hunk says: >>> >>> @@ -0,0 +6 @@ >>> +#include "diff.h" >>> >>> Which is inconsistent with what GNU diff says: >>> >>> @@ -5,0 +6 @@ >>> +#include "diff.h" >>> >>> I've tried this patch but... >> >> The fix is fine, but you should do the same even in the s2 case. The >> correct hunk should have been: >> >> @@ -6,0 +6 @@ > > You are right. GNU says -5,0 not -6,0 so presumably "patch" > other people use expect it to say -5,0 not -6,0; even though we > could argue the insertion happens at 6th position and saying > -6,0 is more logical, it does not matter -- what incumbent does > wins X-<. I notice that your fix shows -5,0 to match it ;-). Yeah, I had to make it such that GNU patch could swallow it, otherwise it made no sense (being it right or not). Even the other issue is fixed now, and I'll send you a libxdiff-based diff as soon as it passes some tests. - Davide