On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 08:41 +0200, Thierry Goubier wrote: > Le 21/04/2015 07:46, stepharo a écrit : > > > >> No, I changed MCMethodDefinition>>= to be more relaxed about > >> sources and treat two sources that differ only in leading/trailing > >> spaces as "same". This way, these methods do not occur in merge tool > >> at all. > >> This is just a quick fix - much better would be to compare AST's and > >> treat whitespace-changes specially (i.e., provide a filter to show/hide > >> whitespace-only-changes). > > > > OK now I wonder if we want to have methods with different end of line > > conventions in the system. > > I pushed a change to MCMethodDefinition>>#= a short while ago because > source code was seeing line ending changes...
Could you point me to that? If you don't mind, I'll merge it as it could help to solve problems I might soon run into :-) > > AST-based comparison would be nice there; however what about the cost? > Some of MC operations are already fairly slow as they are now. If done on a tool level (where this belongs to IMO) it won't be much of a problem. Only one might have to wait for window to come up a little longer... > > Thierry > > > I do not remember the discussion we got long time ago. > > > > Stef > >>> Do you think that we should integrate it? > >> Yes. > >> > >>> Stef > >>> > >>> Le 20/4/15 12:36, Jan Vrany a écrit : > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> I just wanted to merge some code in Monticello and the merge tool > >>>> marked all methods as conflict because their source differ in trailing > >>>> whitespace (newline). The diff panel on the right does not show any > >>>> difference. > >>>> > >>>> http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~JanVrany/Misc/versions/Monticello-Fixes-JanVrany.1 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Here's a fix for this particular problem in case somebody runs into the > >>>> same problem. > >>>> > >>>> Best, Jan > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
