On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:42:20 -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote: > darcs init > # Add 3 lines > vim t.txt > darcs record . > darcs add t.txt > darcs record -am 'initial add' > # Add a new line in the middle > vim t.txt > darcs record
There's nothing like a good minimal test case. :-) [I assume it's the last darcs record where we hit 'e', right?] In this example, deleting the line in the hunk editor indeed appears to have no effect. But that's not particularly surprising if we're working on the principle that the hunk editor does not change the working directory. In effect you've edited the patch into oblivion, so Darcs does not propose anything; but it does propose the "anti-patch" afterwards which brings back the hunk. This is effectively a no-op. I realise this can be a surprising principle given the interface, but I hope it's one that is fairly easy to get the hang of (because this allows us to handle hunk splitting and hunk editing with a single [user] interface). Also, unless I'm missing something, wouldn't you have just said 'n' in the traditional interface for this case? Perhaps a more complex example will convey your idea better? -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
