Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] range-diff: don't remove funcname from inner diff

[Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com>]

On 04/17, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> > I like declaring this a bug.  We are after all parsing
> > machine-generated output, that does come from git (which is why I
> > neglected the NULL checking in the first place).  If that second "@@"
> > is not there it's definitely a bug somewhere in the diff machinery,
> > I'd say.
> 
> Ah, but you do know about the micro-project I proposed to optionally feed
> an mbox to `range-diff`, right?
> 
> The idea behind my proposal is that this would make it possible to
> generate a range-diff between the patches on public-inbox and the commits
> that actually made it into Junio's `pu`...

I had forgotten about that, and was only looking at what the code
currently does.

> > Note that the "@@" also couldn't come from anywhere else, the diff
> > header has a well defined format and so does the metadata.  The diff
> > itself is prefixed with '<', '>' and '#' in this case, and the commit
> > message is also prefixed with four spaces.  So if this breaks
> > somewhere I'd rather hear about it loudly, than let users potentially
> > get wrong output because we missed something somewhere.
> 
> Agreed. But I could imagine that `die()`ing here would be the more
> appropriate way to holler loudly ;-)

Yup, in the light of the potential microproject, I'm fine with just
'die()'ing here.  If we'd get into this situation right now, there
would probably be a bunch of other tests failing as well, so we might
as well make it a little more future proof.  Thanks.