Re: [bug-diffutils] Getting all versions, but skipping overlaps

[Bob Bell]

This is something that would really make merging easier for me.  Should 
I work on coding up a solution of my own?  It would take a lot of work 
to become familiar with the code develop an approach, but I could try 
that if I knew it wouldn't be in vain.

Thanks.

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:31:47PM -0400, Bob Bell wrote:
> Paul, apologies for top-quoting, but do you have any thoughts regarding
> the email I sent below?
>
> On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 06:04:31PM -0400, Bob Bell wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:37:04PM -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > > On 10/03/2012 10:27 PM, Bob Bell wrote:> what I'd really like is 
> > to display the merges > >> file, bracketing the conflicting 
> > changes, NOT including when FILE0 and > >> FILE1 made identical 
> > changes, but when there *IS* a conflicting change, > >> I'd like to 
> > see FILE0, FILE1 *and* FILE2/FILEC.
> > > > Something like that sounds plausible, yes.  Can you give a 
> > brief
> > > example of input files, and what the output would look like,
> > > compared to what it looks like with the various options now?
> > > That'd help us understand exactly what you're proposing.
> >
> > Excellent.  I'm trying to think of the best way to illustrate this, with
> > attaching 6 different files (let me know if you'd like that).  I'll
> > try this approach:
> >
> > We have three files: fileA, fileB and fileC.  fileA was the original
> > file, with 6 lines, from "line 1" through "line 6".  fileB and fileC
> > began as copies of fileA.  Then, fileB changed "line 2" to "line
> > two", while fileC changed "line 2" to "line too".  Both fileB and
> > fileC changed "line eight" to "line ocho".
> >
> > The output of `diff3 -m -X fileC fileA fileB` is:
> > line 1
> > <<<<<<< fileC
> > line too
> > =======
> > line two
> > > > > > > > > fileB
> > line 3
> > line 4
> > line cinco
> > line 6
> >
> > The output of `diff3 -m -A fileC fileA fileB` is:
> > line 1
> > <<<<<<< fileC
> > line too
> > ||||||| fileA
> > line 2
> > =======
> > line two
> > > > > > > > > fileB
> > line 3
> > line 4
> > <<<<<<< fileA
> > line 5
> > =======
> > line cinco
> > > > > > > > > fileB
> > line 6
> >
> > My DESIRED output in this situation, perhaps from "-m -A -X", or
> > something new like "-m -X -2", is:
> > line 1
> > <<<<<<< fileC
> > line too
> > ||||||| fileA
> > line 2
> > =======
> > line two
> > > > > > > > > fileB
> > line 3
> > line 4
> > line cinco
> > line 6
> >
> > I'd be happen to answer any more questions about this.  I really think
> > that it would be beneficial in a number of circumstances I've
> > encountered.
> >
> > -- Bob