(Why Emacs in newsgrouop list?
Because its ediff-cmd *uses* unix/gnu 'diff')
(Why lisp? Because they use emacs)
It isn't exactly *rare* that diff gets out-of-sync;
I'm sure it's happened to all of us -- *especially*
when diffing two sibling-texts that "left home" some
time ago, and evolved separately.
By being "out-of-synch", I mean it pairs-up areas "incorrectly",
in the sense that some more-intelligent process, looking at
the two texts *in their entirety* -- *before* doing the
"pairing".
QUESTION-1: Are there some OTHER find-differences programs,
that analyze the two texts a bit more globally before
finding and pairing-up differences?
(If one does exist, it's output could of course be
post-processed to *look* like that of diff, so that
eg ediff could use it *instead of* diff).
QUESTION-2: Once one sees that the pairing *is* faulty,
what adjustments would be worth-while to make *to* the
two texts?
(Perhaps by adding identical comments at strategically-placed
locations; thus the next issue:
QUESTION-3: but then what rule(s)-of-thumb to use to *pick*
these locations?)
Thanks!
David
I think GNU diff has an option where it tries harder to find a smaller
set of differences. Assuming that smaller means better, that could be
a choice. The documentation also says that this might take longer,
though.
Does this help?
kai
--
I like BOTH kinds of music.
!! "Kai" == Kai Gro�johann <···············@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE> writes:
Kai> I think GNU diff has an option where it tries harder to find a smaller
Kai> set of differences. Assuming that smaller means better, that could be a
Kai> choice. The documentation also says that this might take longer,
Kai> though.
There are two options which I use when diff'ing files. The first, which Kai
mention is the '-d' option, which makes a better job of most problems. The
other one I tinker with is '-w' aka '--ignore-all-space' which sorts out the
most common problem I hit, which is indented {'s getting mistaken when I
reformat badly formatted code and getting totally out of sync. You can also add
-B which ignores blank line changes.
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
--
Toby Haynes
The views and opinions expressed in this message are my own, and do
not necessarily reflect those of IBM Canada.
>>>>> "David" == David Combs <·······@netcom.com> writes:
David> (Why Emacs in newsgrouop list?
David> Because its ediff-cmd *uses* unix/gnu 'diff')
David> (Why lisp? Because they use emacs)
David> It isn't exactly *rare* that diff gets out-of-sync;
David> I'm sure it's happened to all of us -- *especially* when
David> diffing two sibling-texts that "left home" some time ago,
David> and evolved separately.
David> By being "out-of-synch", I mean it pairs-up areas
David> "incorrectly", in the sense that some more-intelligent
David> process, looking at the two texts *in their entirety* --
David> *before* doing the "pairing".
This answer does not really address your question but may be of use.
In emacs the two files can be opened and narrowed to avoid a part that
is too different. Then run ediff-buffers.
--
Pete Forman -./\.- Disclaimer: This post is originated
Western Geophysical -./\.- by myself and does not represent
···········@westgeo.com -./\.- the opinion of Baker Hughes or
http://www.crosswinds.net/~petef -./\.- its divisions.
·······@netcom.com (David Combs) writes:
> It isn't exactly *rare* that diff gets out-of-sync;
>
> I'm sure it's happened to all of us -- *especially*
> when diffing two sibling-texts that "left home" some
> time ago, and evolved separately.
>
> By being "out-of-synch", I mean it pairs-up areas "incorrectly",
> in the sense that some more-intelligent process, looking at
> the two texts *in their entirety* -- *before* doing the
> "pairing".
You might try this first:
(setq ediff-diff-options "-d")
--
Nils Goesche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."