Subject: Re: [PATCH] whitespace: correct bit assignment comments

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 06:39:39 -0700

Patrick Steinhardt <[email-masked]> writes:

> On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 01:36:46PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> diff --git a/diff.h b/diff.h
>> index 2fa256c3ef..60749154e7 100644
>> --- a/diff.h
>> +++ b/diff.h
>> @@ -331,9 +331,9 @@ struct diff_options {
>>  
>>  	int ita_invisible_in_index;
>>  /* white-space error highlighting */
>> -#define WSEH_NEW (1<<12)
>> -#define WSEH_CONTEXT (1<<13)
>> -#define WSEH_OLD (1<<14)
>> +#define WSEH_NEW	(1<<12)
>> +#define WSEH_CONTEXT	(1<<13)
>> +#define WSEH_OLD	(1<<14)
>>  	unsigned ws_error_highlight;
>>  	const char *prefix;
>>  	int prefix_length;
>
> Here you're using tabs for indentation, whereas below you use spaces. We
> should probably be consistent.

Thanks for sharp eyes.

>> +#define WS_TAB_IN_INDENT        (1<<11)
>> +#define WS_TRAILING_SPACE       (WS_BLANK_AT_EOL|WS_BLANK_AT_EOF)
>>  #define WS_DEFAULT_RULE (WS_TRAILING_SPACE|WS_SPACE_BEFORE_TAB|8)
>
> The "8" here is a bit curious, but this matches what the comment says:
> the last two digits are the tab width, and there of course is no macro
> for that.

Yeah, we may need to do something about it later if we further touch
the code around here.

> All of these conversion look correct to me, and I agree that this is
> easier to read.

Thanks.