Re: misleading diff-hunk header

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> Am 21.08.2012 17:42, schrieb Tim Chase:
>> On 08/21/12 10:22, Thomas Rast wrote:
>>>> misleadingly suggesting that the change occurred in the call_me()
>>>> function, rather than in main()
>>>
>>> I think that's intentional, and matches what 'diff -p' does...
>> 
>> Okay...I tested "diff -p" and can't argue (much) with historical
>> adherence.  It just makes it hard for me to gather some stats on the
>> functions that changed, and requires that I look in more than one
>> place (both in the header, and in the leading context) rather than
>> having a single authoritative place to grep.
>
> If it's only for stats, why not just remove the context with -U0?

I actually think you want a way to say -U<sufficiently-large> in
this case instead of unsightly -U99999.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]