On 06/21, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> diff.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++--- > >> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c > >> index 2f9722b382..89466018e5 100644 > >> --- a/diff.c > >> +++ b/diff.c > >> @@ -559,6 +559,24 @@ static void emit_line(struct diff_options *o, const char *set, const char *reset > >> emit_line_0(o, set, reset, line[0], line+1, len-1); > >> } > >> > >> +enum diff_symbol { > >> + DIFF_SYMBOL_SEPARATOR, > > > > Drop the last comma from enum? > > I looked through out code base and for enums this is > actually strictly enforced, so I guess I have to play > by the rules here as I do not want to be the first > to deviate from an upheld standard. > > This will be painful though as the next ~20 patches > add more symbols mostly at the end, maybe I need > to restructure that such that the last symbol stays the same > throughout the series. Thanks for that thought. I don't think this is strictly enforced. If you look at grep.h:197 the enum 'grep_source_type' has a trailing comma. > > > > >> +static void emit_diff_symbol(struct diff_options *o, enum diff_symbol s, > >> + const char *line, int len) > >> +{ > >> + switch (s) { > >> + case DIFF_SYMBOL_SEPARATOR: > >> + fprintf(o->file, "%s%c", > >> + diff_line_prefix(o), > >> + o->line_termination); > >> + break; > > > > As the first patch in the "diff-symbol" subseries of this topic, > > this change must seriously be justified. Why is it so important > > that a printing of an empty line must be moved to a helper function, > > which later will gain ability to show other kind of lines? > > Ah yes. This got lost in comparison to the currently queued series with > diff_lines. The justification for the change was in the buffer patch, > but now we need to have the justification here. > > In the old series, I had copied the same text in all these > refactoring patches, but thought to delete them in this series. The first > refactoring patch makes sense though. > > Thanks, > Stefan -- Brandon Williams