Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> In my opinion, --remerge-diff does this better; wouldn't we want a >> >> ... >> > Between -c and --cc, I do not think there is anything that makes us >> > favor -c over --cc. While the algorithm to decide which hunks out >> > of -c's output to omit was being polished, comparison with -c served >> > a good way to give baseline, but once --cc has become solid, I do >> > not think I've used -c myself. > > Perhaps, then, the user manual should either omit -c, or recommend > users use --cc instead? I do not think I'd miss "-c", but I do not know about others. >> > I personally find that a very trivial merge resolution is far easier >> > to read with --cc than --remerge-diff, the latter being way too >> > verbose. > > Ah, indeed, for those that know the --cc output format well (it takes > a bit to figure out for newcomers), your example demonstrates this > nicely. Thanks. Yup. And newcomers would take a bit to figure out remerge-diff output, too, so my answers were written from the "nobody will stay newcomer forever. now once they get proficient enough, which ones are good for them" viewpoint.
