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-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A2A1F66F for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727901AbgKCQ6N (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:58:13 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:63999 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726581AbgKCQ6M (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:58:12 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D3CEE2E34; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:58:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=8J2p2VS8WHqe nqbcmI/nPKFTjfg=; b=czSzG2LM1Q8fLmwtHuDC+RFc6hVR/HdJV2IyxEqPEVg7 3LhdF7t92XuyzbF1PAGjBURwvTEDTegAa3ZhIVZ1gzDlj9ZbM4pBXJZ4dODlWm9E z0CsRBv1ak9XrkHpmPdmgKw4pMQiZbYgAHg8kVJ1pjUk0ykRCO9buxH78zPAnsw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=ewiEEm kG1DRybvWOgUIYq+rKh3csaVY/Rkgv3vIJQq5DG+tk6D0itR9f1tFgUfTQK0b6cS Pb1lOni9AdKoQEAu5K9YTi975gwZ9Zv0GrPhGTZm6o/MHvkhaoaiw5N6HjewACuH Yv4zlhTJybxEl/0Akqwo3z5lKbiXDBTHgZCPs= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75C7FE2E33; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:58:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B2103E2E30; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:58:07 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Eli Barzilay Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , git Subject: Re: git-diff bug? References: <72cfef26-e986-d34c-eea4-46ec0fda2688@web.de> Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 08:58:04 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Eli Barzilay's message of "Mon, 2 Nov 2020 22:14:07 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BF3B50DC-1DF5-11EB-8B1F-E43E2BB96649-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Eli Barzilay writes: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 5:15 PM Junio C Hamano wrote= : >> >> Eli Barzilay writes: >> >> > How is it valid? >> >> Just this part. Any patch output that correctly explains how the >> preimage text changed to the postimage text is a "valid" diff, and >> that is how Ren=C3=A9 used the word. > > To be clear, the "valid" in my question is about the correctness of > the expected behavior,... I know that, and that is why I clarified that you two are using the same word differently. > In any case, I think that I now see the problem: the (sparse) > explanation says "Ignore changes whose lines are all blank.". It > would have been helpful to clarify with "(but blank likes that are > *part of* a change are still shown)". Looks sensible ;-)