On 08/24/12 11:44, Jeff King wrote:
> With the old code, you'd get:
>
> diff --git a/old b/new
> index f384549..1066a25 100644
> --- a/old
> +++ b/new
> @@ -2,3 +2,3 @@ one
> two
> -three
> +three -- modified
> four
>
> So the hunk header is showing you something useful; the element just
> above your context. But with my patch, you'd see:
>
> diff --git a/old b/new
> index f384549..1066a25 100644
> --- a/old
> +++ b/new
> @@ -2,3 +2,3 @@ two
> two
> -three
> +three -- modified
> four
>
> I.e., it shows the element just before the change, which is already in
> the context anyway. So it's actually less useful. Although note that the
> current behavior is not all that useful, either; it is not really giving
> you any information about the change, but rather just showing one extra
> line of context.
>
> So I would say that which you would prefer might depend on exactly what
> you are diffing. But I would also argue that in any case where the new
> code produces a worse result, the hunk header was not all that useful to
> begin with.
If the documented purpose of "diff -p" (and by proxy
diff.{type}.xfuncname) is to show the name of the *function*
containing the changed lines, and all you have is a list of lines
with no function names, it's pretty arbitrary to call either
behavior "worse". :-)
-tkc
--
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