Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2018, #01; Wed, 10)

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes:

> On 10/10/2018 06:43, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Here are the topics that have been cooking.  Commits prefixed with
>> '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with
>> '+' are in 'next'.  The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of
>> the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them.
>>
>> * pw/diff-color-moved-ws-fix (2018-10-04) 5 commits
>>   - diff --color-moved: fix a memory leak
>>   - diff --color-moved-ws: fix another memory leak
>>   - diff --color-moved-ws: fix a memory leak
>>   - diff --color-moved-ws: fix out of bounds string access
>>   - diff --color-moved-ws: fix double free crash
>>
>>   Various fixes to "diff --color-moved-ws".
>>
>>   What's the status of this topic?
>
> I think it is ready for next - Stefan was happy with the last iteration.

This is not about your fixes, but I was skimming the color-moved
support in general as a final sanity check to move this forward and
noticed that

	$ git diff --color-moved-ws=ignore-any master...

does not do anything interesting, which is broken at at least two
points.

 * There is no "ignore-any" supported by the feature---I think that
   the parser for the option should have noticed and barfed, but it
   did not.  It merely emitted a message to the standard output and
   let it scroll away with the huge diff before the reader noticed
   it.

 * After fixing ignore-any to one of the supported option
   (e.g. "ignore-all-spaces"), the color-moved feature still did not
   trigger.  I think the presence of --color-moved-ws by itself is a
   hint that the user wants --color-moved to be used.  If it turns
   out that there are some valid use cases where --color-moved-ws
   may have to be set but the color-moved feature should not be
   enabled, then

	diff --color-moved-ws=ignore-all-space --no-color-moved

   can be used to countermand this, of course.

Am I missing something or are these mere small sloppiness in the
current code?