From: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
Cc: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs•ath.cx>, git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improve contrib/diff-highlight to highlight unevenly-sized hunks
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:04:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150618190417.GA12769@peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq1th8ga9b.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:08:16AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> So as I said, I do not think it would hurt to have this as an
> incremental improvement (albeit going in a possibly wrong
> direction).
>
> Of course, it is a separate question if this change makes the output
> worse, by comparing unmatched early parts of two hunks and making
> nonsense highlight by calling highlight_pair() more often. As long
> as that is not an issue, I am not opposed to this change, which was
> what I meant to say by "this might not hurt".
Yes, that is my big concern, and why I punted on mismatched-size hunks
in the first place. Now that we have a patch, it is easy enough to "git
log -p | diff-highlight" with the old and new versions to compare the
results.
It certainly does improve some cases. E.g.:
-foo
+foo &&
+bar
in a test script becomes more clear. But some of the output is not so
great. For instance, the very commit under discussion has a
confusing and useless highlight. Or take a documentation patch like
5c31acfb, where I find the highlights actively distracting. We are saved
a little by the "if the whole line is different, do not highlight at
all" behavior of 097128d1bc.
So I dunno. IMHO this does more harm than good, and I would not want to
use it myself. But it is somewhat a matter of taste; I am not opposed to
making it a configurable option.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-18 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-15 17:20 [PATCH] Improve contrib/diff-highlight to highlight unevenly-sized hunks Patrick Palka
2015-06-18 15:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-06-18 16:28 ` Patrick Palka
2015-06-18 18:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-06-18 19:04 ` Jeff King [this message]
2015-06-18 20:14 ` Patrick Palka
2015-06-18 20:45 ` Jeff King
2015-06-18 21:23 ` Jeff King
2015-06-18 21:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-06-18 22:25 ` Patrick Palka
2015-06-19 3:54 ` Jeff King
2015-06-19 4:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-06-19 5:32 ` Jeff King
2015-06-19 7:34 ` Jeff King
2015-06-19 11:38 ` Jeff King
2015-06-19 17:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-06-18 23:06 ` Patrick Palka
2015-06-18 20:23 ` Patrick Palka
2015-06-18 19:08 ` Jeff King
2015-06-18 20:27 ` Patrick Palka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150618190417.GA12769@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=patrick@parcs$(echo .)ath.cx \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox