From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1F020248 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 15:02:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726780AbfDLPCt (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:02:49 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com ([209.85.128.65]:38959 "EHLO mail-wm1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726702AbfDLPCt (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Apr 2019 11:02:49 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id n25so11414876wmk.4 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 08:02:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=7kK1rIodHEAEOug8mP8b/kiqTU1U/6b+I7V0HIfWRWs=; b=jiqxH6g1CKfsNBAosC8Sl6N4ogchsu3U/G+pxtVtn2bq2Tq/zSnb/66o4eh1PApnSE yW1FntQYGXI2PAe/dMMxCVVAH5h2dZfvbqHR5T5SYe7tAP8yt6ESJVPGUrtFSDBM6a09 NOkWhckSGzEbyc2grHxpBaNg5BEUkFNgGyGf3DNMWjvestTu3RpXioP+tcX/3OtP+JhO rrD1Mf8SXLO5HKUiqEuzeNA2ca3rIKGtvl9s7xmnIqwkUjcPBJprBLXQtVM9teWnXhiW Bw9E1HrE9BQCqGI9SVgY+V3O5KPMqZpU61XyBGGwIjOQRSkUcV/Ic9r0ige1NBCbuVxF hFcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=7kK1rIodHEAEOug8mP8b/kiqTU1U/6b+I7V0HIfWRWs=; b=gBg+aGIT+cEWjkIqSKyiNZy8xoTFnHMzWLDZM+D1CTetDaE73/h0f0S7CwtvTcnlmr W5TI2uMTyT/8X7JOZKkic/W79WkcFd13xyyllUWhvsr8CkVT85RxBNRq8cCIJr+u26qA iJ5Ii5H1hiTsqLrHOUrk6x1uyQfV+FN0NfMMpgt9JNNBW4EUv40oVnuTOrpL7s7OHgNS 2LR2VUMWzPK8FsjPc3Z7G0FpbjoZN9T/2UlJ8QfU6tcY3w/uvOeDSgRgqWyDGEdlpqeX pJANeTOq4slPJfwPYN08b1SuOJLKtm2lzftGHuMIc/dTuymBfbsRz4J5Zjz6wQCbkcj6 COhA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW4XqFYtNYQF3OuFxAfEkgOYhQkjlP/53NSSDzMkcb3D6iyqHdS 1RhZOOwzspZ9MOKZp4bUzqI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyfSaCWF9775ZGh500599aJ2p9zyquJrhggLSoNaD+eMT/3ythfT1Ncn4FvfBHAs9B/xTGg4Q== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e90f:: with SMTP id q15mr11180530wmc.1.1555081367184; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 08:02:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (141.255.76.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.76.255.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m6sm52956476wrr.53.2019.04.12.08.02.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Apr 2019 08:02:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: Duy Nguyen , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: incorrect range-diff output? References: <20190411111729.GB5620@ash> <20190411220532.GG32487@hank.intra.tgummerer.com> Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2019 00:02:46 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20190411220532.GG32487@hank.intra.tgummerer.com> (Thomas Gummerer's message of "Thu, 11 Apr 2019 23:05:32 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gummerer writes: > I'm not sure what the right solution for this is. I think one thing > I'd like range-diff to do is to add the filename, or some context > (e.g. is this part of the commit message etc.) to the @@ line (not > sure what that is called?). Perhaps the inner diff can be done with the usual funcname/xfuncname logic so that the real function name of the payload is on the @@ lines (they are internally called "hunk header" lines, I think). And then the outer diff (i.e. the one that compares two inner diff output) can use a special funcname pattern that says "treat the lines that begin with '@@ ' as the function name line", instead of (or in addition to??) the logic that says "lines that begin with 'diff --git' have interesting information" which led to a misleading piece of information in the range-diff output under discussion, perhaps?