Re: Mark trailing whitespace error in del lines of diff

Christian Brabandt <cblists@256bit.org>, Christian Brabandt <cb@256bit.org> writes:

Even if this change introduced a bug that changed the behaviour (e.g. say, exited with failure status code when only preimage had errors), I wouldn't be surprised if no existing test caught such a breakage. Because the existing tests were written with the assumption that the code to check whitespace breakages would never look at preimage, it is plausible that no preimage line used in the test has any whitespace error in the first place.

In other words, you'd need to add new tests that change preimage lines with various kinds of whitespace errors into postimage lines with and without whitespace errors, and run "diff" with various combinations of the existing set of core.whitespace values as well as your new one.

But as I said in the other message, I think that the approach this patch takes goes in a wrong direction. Instead of adding a single "check and highlight this and only kind of breakage on preimage" option as a new kind to existing "what kind of use of whitespaces are errors" set, it would be more sensible to add a single "check and highlight breakages on preimage lines as well" option that is orthogonal to the existing ones that specify "what kind of use of whitespaces are errors".