GNU bug report logs - #1183
23.0.60; ediff-buffers is broken

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:55:03 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #160 received at submit <at> emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: <kifer <at> cs.sunysb.edu>, <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>,
        <1183 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>, <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>,
        <kifer <at> cs.stonybrook.edu>
Subject: RE: bug#1183: 23.0.60; ediff-buffers is broken
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 11:35:46 -0700
> > > > > > But first, we should decide whether we want such 
> > > > > > buffers to compare equal or not.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I believe we do, because it's called ediff-buffers.  There's 
> > > > > ediff-files for when you want to compare the files.
> > > > 
> > > > That's terrible. Ediff-buffers has always been usable 
> > > > directly for buffers visiting files also. 
> > > 
> > > I didn't see the original post, but the general idea was that 
> > > whenever things look the same in Emacs they should be treated
> > > as equal (or equal module spaces). I do not think the user
> > > should be bothered with encodings. Copying from buffer
> > > to buffer should also be transparent. (And ediff-files and 
> > > ediff-buffers should produce the same results.)
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately, I have not been following the developments in 
> > > the last few years, and my knowledge of the mechanics 
> became rusty.
> > 
> > Everything Michael said sounds right to me.
> 
> Then why did you say "that's terrible" in response to Stefan who
> expressed the same view as Michael?  They both say that what is
> _displayed_ the same in Emacs should compare equal in ediff-buffers.

I guess I misunderstood. I thought that Stefan was saying that ediff-buffers
should continue to do what it is doing now: just show one big difference, with
no distinction of textual differences, and force users to use ediff-files to see
the textual differences. If he meant the same thing as Michael, then we agree.

The two buffers I reported on should *not* compare equal, but neither should
ediff-buffers just throw up its hands and say only "they're different somehow".
I mistakenly thought that Stefan was saying that ediff-buffers should not
distinguish their textual differences but should just report that they are
different (one big diff). IOW, I thought he was saying that the current behavior
is correct for ediff-buffers but that ediff-files should, as always, show the
textual differences.

> OTOH, "M-x ediff" that compares _files_ will still show differences
> for identical text encoded differently in each of the files.

Again, I have no problem with ediff commands also showing or otherwise
identifying encoding differences. 

What I objected to was that textual differences were being effectively lost,
because ediff-buffers just displays one big diff with identical, full-buffer
highlighting - it doesn't show the textual differences at all.

Sorry for any misunderstanding. It sounds now like we're all in more or less
agreement.






This bug report was last modified 16 years and 218 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.