On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Ganesh Sittampalam <gan...@earth.li> wrote: > Interesting idea - one difficulty I see is how you save the answers. If > you do it positionally, then any subsequent edits to the source tree > would make them invalid. Doing it textually would make the whole thing > pretty big.
I was just assuming it could save a transcript, so each hunk and answer. Then on replay if the hunk doesn't match, stop the replay. It doesn't seem that big to me, basically a subset of what you'd get from 'darcs w'. Just always save it, and delete it after a record or an explicit cancel. Of course you could get more sophisticated, like resume the replay if the hunks start matching up again, as would happen if you added a new file. > More sophisticated interactive selection is definitely interesting in > general. One thing I'd like to see is a graphical interface (e.g. > integrated with darcsden). A nicely done interface could make it easy to > record multiple patches and revert some hunks simultaneously, which is > often something I find myself wanting when doing a big record. I haven't found myself changing my mind about a hunk. Either it belongs to the patch or not. I guess if I wanted to split a complicated patch in two... but I've never needed that. But people swear by kgit, so obviously some people are doing fancy things. I've found that really the only thing I want to use to look at and edit code is the editor. Anything else will be too limited and I'll eventually have to switch to the editor, or it will be missing all the tags and searching and whatnot the editor has. That's why I'd prefer to do hunk selection and editing in the same editor I used to write it in the first place. I guess that's the line of thinking that gets you emacs and IDEs though :) _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list darcs-users@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
