On 04/15, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Sun, 14 Apr 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > > > @@ -99,10 +90,10 @@ modified file Documentation/git-revert.txt > > A better example might be a .c file, as the function name is often a > pretty useful piece of information. Yeah, maybe with your suggestions, we could fit the function name or some of the function name into the outer hunk header. I'll give it a try and see how it looks. > Read: I think it should be part of the outer hunk header. > > Also, the text "modified file" takes up an awful lot of space. Maybe we do > not really need that information? > > While at it, we could strip the line numbers, as this is not intended for > machine consumption, but for human consumption instead. Yeah, that makes sense, the line numbers are really kind of pointless in a range-diff. > > [...] > > Note that this patch series doesn't modify or add any tests, and was > > just manually tested locally, thus it is still marked as RFC. > > Oh, okay then ;-) > > Thanks for working on this, > Dscho
