On 2007-11-26, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But I do suspect the other VC systems are a lot better than `diff3` when it > comes to merging, and they do retain history (although perhaps not in the > first-class way that darcs does).
I'd say "different" rather than "better", for both Darcs and other VCSs. There are some things that would cause a conflict in Darcs that Mercurial will automatically resolve for me via kdiff3 or diff3 (or my custom diff/patch logic). There are also the opposite situations, though they tend to fall into neat boxes that can be easily scripted around (with shell scripts). In general, I find Mercurial to be better at merging in situations where both branches committed the same change. Occurs surprisingly often in real life, alas. I find Darcs to be better at merging in situations where separate lines in close proximity were modified. However, I also find that behavior to be potentially dangerous. -- John _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
