On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Tomasz Pala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 10:04:40 +0100, Patryk Zawadzki wrote: >> foo1.py is the original, foo.patch is the patch against that (altered >> to mention foo2.py for easy testing). foo2.py is the new file. Run: > It's the _patch_ that's broken, not patching with -l.
How is that patch broken? You mean the offset? Just add one line to foo1.py so they are equal in length but the indentation level changes. >> patch -p0 -l < foo.patch >> >> to break the code instead of failing. > Oh, breaking the code by dumb patching is always a case. The point is: > 'patch -l' DOESN'T break anything as you were saying. Breaking the code in this way and for dynamically compiled languages means we'll find the error two weeks after building a package. It DOES break the code by making it invalid (if this happened in the middle of the file you'd get a nice syntax error at run-time due to broken indentation or just buggy behavior depending on the place in the code block) and giving no error at patch-time. Ignoring whitespace in Python is like ignoring dots in brainfuck or ignoring brace in C. -- Patryk Zawadzki _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
