Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>> (2) In the ranges "-L <anything>,/B/ -L /C/,<anything>", the
>>>> beginning of the second range is found by choosing C that comes
>>>> _after_ the end of the previous range (/B/ may choose either
>>>> the second or the 4th line, and the only C that comes after
>>>> either of them is the 5th line and that is where the second
>>>> range should begin, not at the beginning of the file). The
>>>> same for "-L 1,3 -L /C/" (only C that comes after 3 is eligible
>>>> to be the beginning of the second range).
>>>
>>> So passing several -L arguments does not blame the union of what each
>>> argument would blame individually? Doesn't that make it rather harder
>>> to explain?
>>
>> I don't think Junio meant to imply that. Collecting the blame ranges
>> can/should be a distinct step from coalescing them. Junio is saying
>> that an -L /re/ range search should start after the maximum line
>> number already specified by any preceding range.
>
> I am not sure if I want "maximum specified so far". I meant "start
> searching at the last location", e.g.
>
> -L 100,200 -L 4,6 -L /A/,+20
>
> would want to find the first A after line 6, not after line 200.
Ok, so my point (in new words, since the old one was apparently too
terse) is:
If you define it that way, the output of
git blame -L 4,6; git blame -L /A/,+20
is significantly different from
git blame -L 4,6 -L /A/,+20
Not just in the presentation or any possible coalescing, but in the
meaning of the ranges.
Do you really want to make it that way?
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
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