Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style
flat view
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:45:15
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style · Junio C Hamano <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style · Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style · Junio C Hamano <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style · Junio C Hamano <hidden>
- 2016-06-15 · Re: [PATCH 2/2 - RFH/WIP] xdiff-merge: optionally show conflicts in "diff3 -m" style · Junio C Hamano <hidden>
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Some poeple find it easier to be able to understand what is going on when they can view the common ancestor's version, which is used by "diff3 -m", which shows: <<<<<<< postimage from one side; ||||||| shared preimage; ======= postimage of the other side; and >>>>>>> This is an initial step to bring that as an optional feature to git. Only "git merge-file" has been converted, with "--diff3" option.
If you have the common ancestor, why would you ever want this format, and not a nice conflict entry in the index? Anyway, that's irrelevant for my real question, which is:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
/* - * level == 0: mark all overlapping changes as conflict - * level == 1: mark overlapping changes as conflict only if not identical - * level == 2: analyze non-identical changes for minimal conflict set - * level == 3: analyze non-identical changes for minimal conflict set, but - * treat hunks not containing any letter or number as conflicting + * "Level" parameter can be: + * + * (MINIMAL): + * Mark all overlapping changes as conflict + * + * (EAGER): + * Mark overlapping changes as conflict only if not identical + * + * (DIFF3): + * Same as EAGER but show the shared preimage in the output as well + * + * (ZEALOUS): + * Analyze non-identical changes for minimal conflict set + * + * (ZEALOUS_ALNUM): + * Analyze non-identical changes for minimal conflict set, but + * treat hunks not containing any letter or number as conflicting *
Wouldn't it be much nicer to make this a bitflag, than an enumeration of different models? In particular, why would it be wrong to want to be ZEALOUS (possibly _ALNUM) and still want DIFF3 output? IOW, I don't think these are at all disjoint sets. In fact, I think DIFF3 sounds not at all like a "level" to me, but like an output format thing, so it's in a totally different "address space". Hmm? Linus