Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, Kyle Meyer wrote:
>
>> 275267937b (range-diff: make dual-color the default mode, 2018-08-13)
>> replaced --dual-color with --no-dual-color but left the option's
>> summary untouched. Rewrite the summary to describe --no-dual-color
>> rather than dual-color.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> builtin/range-diff.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/range-diff.c b/builtin/range-diff.c
>> index f52d45d9d6..7dc90a5ec3 100644
>> --- a/builtin/range-diff.c
>> +++ b/builtin/range-diff.c
>> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ int cmd_range_diff(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> OPT_INTEGER(0, "creation-factor", &creation_factor,
>> N_("Percentage by which creation is weighted")),
>> OPT_BOOL(0, "no-dual-color", &simple_color,
>> - N_("color both diff and diff-between-diffs")),
>> + N_("restrict coloring to outer diff markers")),
>
> How about "use simple diff colors" instead?
I am wondering if it makes sense to remove the option altogether.
I've been trying to view the comparison of the same ranges in both
styles for the past few days, and I never found a reason to choose
"no dual color" option myself.
