On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 03:18:02PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:

> > Let's resolve by giving the xdiff variant a scoped name,
> > which is closer to other xdiff types anyway (e.g.,
> > xdlfile_t, though note that xdiff is fond if typedefs when
> > Git usually is not).
> Makes sense to me. I didn't try to adhere to xdiff conventions too
> tightly because I don't think that project is alive anymore, so I don't
> expect we'll be upstreaming anything [1]. But this change definitely
> makes sense.

Yeah, TBH I don't really care about following xdiff coding conventions.
They're pretty far from our own, and at this point I think xdiff is
basically just an imported part of our code base. Mostly my rationale
was that it's not too terribly out of place to give it an "xdl" name,
and it happens to solve my other problem, too. :)

> [1] Though I've since learned that libgit2 also bases their diff code on
> xdiff, so if we avoid changing things gratuitously there is more chance
> that our two projects can benefit from each other's improvements
> whenever they are also licensed compatibly.

I'd agree on not changing things gratuitously.


Reply via email to