> -----Original Message-----
> From: Branko Čibej [mailto:brane_at_xbc.nu] On Behalf Of Branko Cibej
> Sent: donderdag 16 juni 2011 12:33
> To: Daniel Shahaf
> Cc: Johan Corveleyn; Julian Foad; m.schaber_at_3s-software.com;
> Subject: Re: diff wish
> On 16.06.2011 01:14, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > Branko Čibej wrote on Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 14:44:45 +0200:
> >> On 15.06.2011 14:11, Johan Corveleyn wrote:
> >>>> If you have a different definition of "mis-synchronizes", please explain.
> >>> No, I don't mean a broken diff. The diff should at all times be
> >>> *correct*. That was indeed never questioned.
> >>> I mean something like the example Neels gave with his initial approach
> >>> for avoid the mis-matching empty line problem. With the naive
> >>> solution, he gave an example of where it's not nice:
> >> [...]
> >> But when would the current "minimal" diff be preferable to the nicest,
> >> albeit not minimal, diff we can produce? After all, the fix and/or
> >> patience diff result is not only nicer to look at, it also gives better
> >> results for blame, which is the other big diff consumer. Likewise, it'll
> > Why doesn't 'svn blame' take --diff-cmd then?
> Because --diff-cmd can launch some external interactive tool, and I'm
> sure you don't want to do that while diffing fifteen hundred revisions
> of history.
And because we would have to parse the output to find out which lines were changed, as that is what blame needs to produce its output.
Received on 2011-06-16 13:04:08 CEST