range-diff, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jul 2018, #03; Wed, 25)

> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > Count me in the "this is useful" camp, but also I did look at the latest
> > submission this time around, but had nothing to say, so I didn't say
> > anything :)
> 
> Please make it a habit to do say something to show that you did
> carefully review the series especially in such a case, which helps
> to differentiate a change that is interesting to nobody, and one
> that is so obviously well done that there is nothing to add.  
> 
> What I have been doing from time to time, when I think there is
> nothing bad in particular to point out, is to quote a part that is
> especially tricky to get right and think it aloud to show how I
> would reason why the result of the change is correct.  This type of
> review helps in two and a half ways:
> 
>  (1) We can see a correction to what the reviewer said, which could
>      lead to further improvement ("no, the code does not quite work
>      that way, so it is still buggy", or "no, the code does not work
>      that way, but triggering that bug is impossible because the
>      caller high above will not call us in that case", etc.),
> 
>  (2) The reviewer can demonstrate to others that s/he understands
>      the area being touched well enough to explain how it works
>      correctly, and a "looks good to me" comment from the reviewer
>      on that change becomes more credible than a mere "looked good
>      and I have nothing else to add".
> 
> Thanks.