From: René Scharfe Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:39:36 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] xdiff: trim common tail with -U0 after diff Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170623103612.4694-1-git@thequod.de> Am 23.06.2017 um 12:36 schrieb Daniel Hahler: > When -U0 is used, trim_common_tail should be called after `xdl_diff`, so > that `--indent-heuristic` (and other diff processing) works as expected. > > It also removes the check for `!(xecfg->flags & XDL_EMIT_FUNCCONTEXT)` > added in e0876bca4, which does not appear to be necessary anymore after > moving the trimming down. > > This only adds a test to t4061-diff-indent.sh, but should also have one for > normal (i.e. non-experimental) diff mode probably?! > > Ref: https://github.com/tomtom/quickfixsigns_vim/issues/74#issue-237900460 > --- > t/t4061-diff-indent.sh | 15 +++++++++++++++ > xdiff-interface.c | 7 ++++--- > 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t4061-diff-indent.sh b/t/t4061-diff-indent.sh > index 2affd7a10..df3151393 100755 > --- a/t/t4061-diff-indent.sh > +++ b/t/t4061-diff-indent.sh > @@ -116,6 +116,16 @@ test_expect_success 'prepare' ' > 4 > EOF > > + cat <<-\EOF >spaces-compacted-U0-expect && > + diff --git a/spaces.txt b/spaces.txt > + --- a/spaces.txt > + +++ b/spaces.txt > + @@ -4,0 +5,3 @@ a > + +b > + +a > + + > + EOF > + > tr "_" " " <<-\EOF >functions-expect && > diff --git a/functions.c b/functions.c > --- a/functions.c > @@ -184,6 +194,11 @@ test_expect_success 'diff: --indent-heuristic with --histogram' ' > compare_diff spaces-compacted-expect out-compacted4 > ' > > +test_expect_success 'diff: --indent-heuristic with -U0' ' > + git diff -U0 --indent-heuristic old new -- spaces.txt >out-compacted5 && > + compare_diff spaces-compacted-U0-expect out-compacted5 > +' > + > test_expect_success 'diff: ugly functions' ' > git diff --no-indent-heuristic old new -- functions.c >out && > compare_diff functions-expect out The changed test script passes just fine for me even without your change to xdiff-interface.c, which is odd. Do you have another way to demonstrate the unexpected behavior? And can someone replicate the failure? René