On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 6:01 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> But for the purpose of this "moved line coloring", >> excluding multiple copy destinations of the same thing may be a >> simpler and more robust solution. It will not catch "somebody >> stupidly removed one function and made two private copies", though. > > Let me take this one back. Treating multiple copy destinations and > multiple copy sources differently is a bad idea. It is easy for a > user to give "-R" option to "diff" to turn such a stupid patch into > "somebody brilliantly consolidated two copies of the same thing into > a single function", and we want to keep "diff" and "diff -R" output > symmetric. Thanks for the pointer with "blame -C". I'll look through the archives to see if there are good discussions that yield ideas for this.
