[darcs-users] more hunk editing feedback (was: Re: darcs 2.4 beta 3release)

Eric Kow kowey at darcs.net
Thu Jan 28 14:52:08 UTC 2010


On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 09:42:20 -0500, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> darcs init
> # Add 3 lines
> vim t.txt
> darcs record .
> darcs add t.txt
> darcs record -am 'initial add'
> # Add a new line in the middle
> vim t.txt
> darcs record

There's nothing like a good minimal test case. :-)
 [I assume it's the last darcs record where we hit 'e', right?]

In this example, deleting the line in the hunk editor indeed
appears to have no effect.

But that's not particularly surprising if we're working on the principle
that the hunk editor does not change the working directory.  In effect
you've edited the patch into oblivion, so Darcs does not propose
anything; but it does propose the "anti-patch" afterwards which brings
back the hunk.  This is effectively a no-op.

I realise this can be a surprising principle given the interface, but I
hope it's one that is fairly easy to get the hang of (because this
allows us to handle hunk splitting and hunk editing with a single [user]
interface).

Also, unless I'm missing something, wouldn't you have just said 'n'
in the traditional interface for this case?  Perhaps a more complex
example will convey your idea better?

-- 
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20100128/018e8d5d/attachment.pgp>


More information about the darcs-users mailing list