begin quoting Andrew Lentvorski as of Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 11:09:18AM -0700: [snip] > Diff, however, begs to disagree. It *loves* to match on single braces > rather than finding the extremely large chunk of matching text further on.
I'm assuming you've played with --minimal and --horizon-lines ? > I would *really* like a differ that tries a little harder to find > context. That way, when I make changes to the original files and then > diff them against the merged file, it should pretty much propagate the > changes forward withotu a lot of hand editing. > > Any ideas? I've found that when the normal diff makes it hard to see what the difference is, vimdiff sometimes does a decent job. Even so, I don't think it does quite what you're looking for... if common lines are found, some bizzare output can result (I add a new method, and it ends with 3 closing-braces, as does the method that follows, so it says "Hey, you deleted lot of stuff, and then there's three lines that match, and then you added a bunch of stuff!" Arg!) Does the mac graphical diff tool do the right thing? -- _ |\_ \| -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
