>>>>> "Ketil" == Ketil Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ketil> I'm not sure I follow you. Could you give an example (of a
Ketil> LaTeX or other textual document) where commutation across a
Ketil> word based diff would break something and be less desirable
Ketil> than a conflict? Would this happen often enough compared
Ketil> to conflicts?
No, I can't offhand. Your intuition may be correct, since inside of
document text the character is actually the syntactic unit, while
humans will think in terms of words. On the other hand, I worry about
program words (ie, macros and non-text arguments like the column spec
in tabular environments). You can't deal with those without
special-casing TeX documents.
Ketil> I'm (of course) not saying you should always do word-based
Ketil> diffs, only for formats where line-based diffs work poorly.
How is darcs going to know? I suppose you could teach it, but what's
the interface going to be?
>> Which is another reason why the algorithms should be under
>> control of a scriptable editor....
Ketil> As long as I don't *depend* on the editor to manipulate
Ketil> (apply, pull, push, record..) patches or depend on
Ketil> separately distributed functionality.
Too late. You're already stuck using the unique editor that
understands darcs tokreplace patches: darcs. Now you're talking about
adding more of those, locking users into darcs.
If the editor were Emacs, I would *personally* find that restriction
tolerable.
--
School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.abridgegame.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
