Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Am 16.02.21 um 02:30 schrieb Junio C Hamano: >> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> This new behavior does give us the edge case that if we e.g. view the >>> diff here with "-U150 -W" we'd previously extend the context to the >>> middle of the "is_func_rec()" function, and show that function in the >>> hunk context. Now we'll show nothing. >> To me, that sounds like a grave regression. Why lose the >> information? >> This may be coming from the difference between us, i.e. I read a lot >> more patches written by other people than my own changes written for >> my next commit, so every bit of hint helps, and the name of the >> function I am seeing its latter half in the precontext is sometimes >> a useful thing to see. > > I totally agree with your assessment. I wouldn't even have removed the > hunk header in the case of "-W wins", either, but that is a case that > I can live with when others think it makes sense. Ditto. The information on @@ ... @@ line may look misleading especially to those who are not used to reading patches in the "-W wins" case. It is otherwise not hurting anybody and it loses information to remove it, but it is not as grave as in the "-U<n> wins" case, so I do not mind losing it, if it helps them.
