Web lists-archives.com

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] output improvements for git range-diff

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