On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jeff King <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 04:45:05PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > >> Still, I think this is probably a minority case, and it may be >> outweighed by the improvements. The "real" solution is to consider the >> hunk as a whole and do an LCS diff on it, which would show that yes, >> it's worth highlighting both of those spots, as they are a small >> percentage of the total hunk. > > I've been meaning to play with this for years, so I took the opportunity > to spend a little time on it. :)
Cool! > > Below is a (slightly hacky) patch I came up with. It seems to work, and > produces really great output in some cases. For instance, in 99a2cfb, it > produces (I put highlighted bits in angle brackets): > > - <hash>cpy(peeled, <sha1>); > + <oid>cpy(<&>peeled, <oid>); > > It also produces nonsense like: > > - <un>s<ign>ed <char >peeled<[20]>; > + s<truct obj>e<ct_i>d peeled; That's not even so bad. The diff of the change itself is... interesting. > > but I think that is simply because my splitting function is terrible (it > splits each byte, whereas we'd probably want to use whitespace and > punctuation, or something content-specific). I hope you can polish this. It definitely has potential. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
