Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/2] (x)diff cleanup: remove duplicate code

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 14:11:21 +0900

Stefan Beller <[email-masked]> writes:

> v2:
> * I realized that we don't have to change the hashing function of xdiff;
>   we can rather change the hashing function for the move detection,
>   which is less fundamental.
>   (That way I can shrink the series down to 2 patches)
> * commented and renamed function parameters in the exposed xdiff functions.
> * applies on top of jk/diff-color-moved-fix.

Yes, by reusing the line hashing and comparison from xdiff/ we can
ensure that we will use consistent comparison function, and the
thing we need to focus on will become how correctly the caller uses
the xdiff interface.  This looks much better than the previous one.

Eric's comment on the function parameters is right.  We keep them in
sync with the naming convention of xdiff/ as long as they are still
part of xdiff layer, and the convention there is that the lines
being compared are l1[] and l2[] whose lengths are s1 and s2, if I
am not mistaken (well, I am not, as I just touched the function
there during my lunch break ;-).