* Phillip Wood [2018-09-13 11:20]: >Yes in the long term we want to be able to coalesce edited hunks, but I >think it is confusing to call coalesce_overlapping_hunks() at the moment >as it will not coalesce the edited hunks. I would see it as a first step into that direction. >I think that if you split a hunk, edit the first subhunk, transforming a >trailing context line to a deletion then try if you try to stage the >second subhunk it will fail. With your patch the edit will succeed as >the second subhunk is skipped when testing the edited patch. Then when >you try to stage the second subhunk it will fail as it's leading context >will contradict the trailing lines of the edited subhunk. With the old >method the edit failed but didn't store up trouble for the future. Agreed. I guess the question is if you assume a hunk to be applied or skipped as the default. You can still find enough cases where neither the current nor the patched version works. I stumbled upon the one case where I wanted to stage only one part of a split hunk and that one worked after my patch. I leave it up to you if the added benefit overweights the stored up trouble. Cheers Jochen