Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 09:15:44AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >>> That's probably a reasonable sanity check, but I think we need to abort >>> and not just have a too-small DISPLAY array. Because later code like the >>> hunk-splitting is going to assume that there's a 1:1 line >>> correspondence. We definitely don't want to end up in a situation where >>> we show one thing but apply another. >> >> Yes, agreed completely. > > Let's add this sanity check while we're thinking about it. Here's a > series. > > [1/2]: t3701: add a test for interactive.diffFilter > [2/2]: add--interactive: detect bogus diffFilter output > > git-add--interactive.perl | 8 ++++++++ > t/t3701-add-interactive.sh | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+) With or without the tweak Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason suggested, Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks. It's probably also worth adding Sam's reported-by to patch 2/2: Reported-by: Sam Kuper <sam.kuper@xxxxxxxxxxx>
