Re: incorrect range-diff output?

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi Thomas,

On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Thomas Gummerer wrote:

> On 04/11, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > Try
> >
> >     git range-diff from...to
> >
> > with those two branches from https://gitlab.com/pclouds/git.git. The
> > interesting part is this
> >
> >       diff --git a/Documentation/gitcli.txt b/Documentation/gitcli.txt
> >       --- a/Documentation/gitcli.txt
> >     @@ -120,10 +111,11 @@
> >         * linkgit:git-commit[1] to advance the current branch.
> >
> >      -  * linkgit:git-reset[1] and linkgit:git-checkout[1] (with
> >     -+  * linkgit:git-reset[1] and linkgit:git-restore[1] (with
> >     -     pathname parameters) to undo changes.
> >     +-    pathname parameters) to undo changes.
> >     ++  * linkgit:git-restore[1] to undo changes.
> >
> >         * linkgit:git-merge[1] to merge between local branches.
> >     +
> >
> > This particular hunk comes from giteveryday.txt, not gitcli.txt. And
> > the b/Documentation/gitcli.txt line is also missing.
>
> I think the output here is technically correct, even though it is very
> misleading.  range-diff doesn't currently show the filenames of the
> diff that changed, which makes this a bit hard to read.

True. In the spirit of the "funcname" feature of our `git diff` command,
we could add some (abbreviated) form of the corresponding `diff` lines
(maybe just the `a/` filename? Or maybe the `a/` file name, prefixed by
`-` or `+`, and if the `b/` filename is different, `old->new`? With
`/dev/null` substituted by `(new)` or `(deleted)`?).

> [...]
>
> Maybe I can find some time over the weekend to tackle this, if nobody
> else gets to it first.

Good luck ;-)

Ciao,
Dscho