[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

RE: New diff syntax? (see issue #1142)

From: Sander Striker <striker_at_apache.org>
Date: 2003-05-16 01:58:20 CEST

> From: cmpilato@collab.net [mailto:cmpilato@collab.net]
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 1:41 AM

> Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU> writes:
> > Long, long ago, I raised two proposals for the svn diff syntax. See:
> > <http://subversion.tigris.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=14290>.
> >
> > There was the "smart" proposal and the "dumb" proposal; the "dumb"
> > proprosal was genuinely pretty dumb and should never have received any
> > consideration. But I believe there was consensus at that time on the
> > "smart" proposal, which was:
> >
> > Iterative case: svn diff [-r {N|N:M}] TARGET ...
> > Comparative case: svn diff TARGET TARGET
> >
> > In the comparative case, TARGET can be URL@REV as well as just URL or
> > WCPATH, of course. To resolve the ambiguous case where two targets
> > are specified and no -r option is given:
> >
> > If both targets are wc paths, assume iterative case.
> > Otherwise, assume comparative case.
> -0.99. This kind of "document around the edge case" is bound to bite
> us. The minute we make this change, someone's going to complain about
> how they tried to run 'svn diff trunk/foo tags/0.14/foo' and didn't
> see what they expected.
> That said, I see the benefit of having an iterative case. Maybe the
> thing to do here is to spawn a new subcommand:
> svn diff [TARGET [TARGET ...]] - hits the most common use-case,
> iterative, showing local mods only.
> svn compare TARGET1[@REV1] TARGET[@REV2] - takes care of the
> comparative case.

Ewww. Just forget about the iterative case. Being used to running
diff (yes, diff, not svn diff), I expect, that when provided
two targets, those will be compared. I mean, when have you last
tried "diff X Y Z P ..." ?

We give the user a nice extra in the form of one target, which
shows the local changes to his wc, or when passed specific revs, a
diff between those revs.

In conclusion, -0 on the "smart" proposal, +1 on the previous kfogel/cmpilato
proposal. All IMHO.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri May 16 01:59:09 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.