Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email> writes: > >> On 17/09/2021 08:08, Sergey Organov wrote: >>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>> I'm not sure I follow. What "show -p" has to do with "diff-index --cc"? >>>>> >>>>> My only point here is that usage of *--cc* in *diff-index* is entirely >>>>> undocumneted, and that needs to be somehow resolved. >>>> It was a response to your "historical status quo that is a problem." >>>> I do not think there is any problem with "diff-index --cc" (except >>>> for it wants a better documentation---but that we already agree) but >>> Ah, now I see, but it's exactly lack of documentation (and tests) that I >>> was referring to as the "problem of the historical status quo" on the >>> Git side, so I was somewhat confused by your original response. >>> >>> Also, it's still unclear, even if not very essential, what exactly that >>> "status quo" is when seen from the point of view of gitk. Does gitk >>> actually utilize *particular output* of "diff-index --cc" for better, or >>> gitk would be just as happy if it were synonym for "diff-index -p", or >>> even if it'd be just as happy if --cc were silently consumed by >>> diff-index? >> >> Did Johannes Sixt's earlier answer >> https://lore.kernel.org/git/cbd0d173-ef17-576b-ab7a-465d42c82265@xxxxxxxx/ >> help clarify the choices? > > Sorry, no. I did read that carefully when it has been posted. Further > explanations by Johannes also only tell that gitk expects --cc to be > accepted by diff-index as it likes to treat multiple commands > universally, but don't specify what output git expects from --cc when it > passes it exactly to diff-index. Maybe it just shows the output and have > no other expectations, dunno. And, even more importantly, if gitk uses "git diff-index --cc" for its specific output, is there another, documented way to achieve the same goal? Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
