Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] range-diff doc: add a section about output stability

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 7, 2018, 22:52 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqlg64bivd.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <2504086.hWFjgDPvVf@thunderbird>

Stephen & Linda Smith <ischis2@cox.net> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

>> +This is particularly true when passing in diff options. Currently some
>> +options like `--stat` can as an emergent effect produce output that's
>
> "`--stat` can as an emergent": I read that for times to decided it was correct 
> grammar.   Should it be reworded to read better?   Just a nit.

A pair of comma around "as an ... effect" would make it a bit more readable. It also took me four reads before I convinced myself that the original wants to say "Some options may just do whatever they happen to do that result in pretty useless output".

Show 5 quoted lines

>
>> +quite useless in the context of `range-diff`. Future versions of
>> +`range-diff` may learn to interpret such options in a manner specifc
>> +to `range-diff` (e.g. for `--stat` summarizing how the diffstat
>> +changed).