Re: [PATCHv2 0/8] Resending sb/range-diff-colors

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Aug 14, 2018, 16:45 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kYQtKEprxVkmRW0B5Dd6FXLqVh2DQbGf_8=QDLhu=tYhA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1808141702570.71@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:05 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2018, Stefan Beller wrote:
>
> > This applies on top of js/range-diff (a7be92acd9600), this version
> > * resolves a semantic conflict in the test
> >   (Did range-diff change its output slightly?)
>
> If by semantic conflict you mean...
>
> > 23:  6a1c7698c68 ! 23:  5701745379b t3206: add color test for range-diff --dual-color
> >     @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
> >      +        :         s/4/A/<RESET>
> >      +        :     <RESET>
> >      +        :    <REVERSE><GREEN>+<RESET><BOLD>    Also a silly comment here!<RESET>
> >     -+        :    <REVERSE><GREEN>+<RESET>
> >     ++        :    <REVERSE><GREEN>+<RESET><BOLD><RESET>
>
> ... this, then I do not understand. This looks like a straight-up change
> in your commit. v1 of this patch did not append <BOLD><RESET> to the end,
> while v2 apparently does.

Yes, I did mean this. Both before and now the test passes on top of
 js/range-diff (which was resend), so I concluded that the logic in
range-diff itself
has changed. However this is changed in a later patch to not appear any more.

>
> In any case, from what I see you indeed addressed all my comments (the
> need_reset was done differently than I suggested, but still okay).

Thanks.

So unless I hear from other people I consider this series done. (just like range-diff is not going to be resend but built on top now)

Thanks, Stefan