On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:07:15PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> > And figuring out "B" here
> > would be prohibitively difficult, I would think, as it would require
> > applying the funcname rules internal to git-diff to a hunk that git-diff
> > itself never actually sees.
> You can actually apply a split hunk being proposed to a temporary
> file and then ask "git diff" about it, so I do not think difficult
> is too much of an issue,

True, I didn't think of that.

> but I doubt we would want to see header_B,
> exactly because when the user says "Split this hunk", s/he is very
> well aware that the second one is artificial and was split from the
> original hunk whose header said header_A.

Right, that's along the lines of the "you could make the argument" I was
thinking of. Since you are thinking it, too, I'm definitely in favor of
stopping at Ævar's patch and seeing if anybody even notices or


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to