Better support for customising context lines in --patch commands
#1915
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ | ||
| `-U<n>`:: | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Phillip Wood wrote (reply to this): Hi Leon
On 10/05/2025 14:46, Leon Michalak via GitGitGadget wrote:
> From: Leon Michalak <[email protected]>
> > This patch compliments the previous commit, where builtins that use
> add-patch infrastructure now respect diff.context and
> diff.interHunkContext file configurations.
> > In particular, this patch helps users who don't want to set persistent
> context configurations or just want a way to override them on a one-time
> basis, by allowing the relevant builtins to accept corresponding command
> line options that override the file configurations.
> > This mimics commands such as diff and log, which allow for both context
> file configuration and command line overrides.
The code changes here mostly look good, I've left a few comments
below. I think the tests could be improved, I've left some suggestions
on limiting the number of tests while improving the coverage. The new
tests I'm suggesting that check invalid option combinations are the
basis for most of my code comments.
There is still the issue of what to do with -U0. As I mentioned
previously "git apply" will fail when we try to apply the patch. We
can either pass the appropriate flag when the context is zero or
possibly use -U0 to mean the default number of context lines.
> diff --git a/Documentation/diff-context-options.adoc b/Documentation/diff-context-options.adoc
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..e161260358ff
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/diff-context-options.adoc
> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
> +`-U<n>`::
> +`--unified=<n>`::
> + Generate diffs with _<n>_ lines of context. Defaults to `diff.context`
> + or 3 if the config option is unset.
> +
> +`--inter-hunk-context=<n>`::
> + Show the context between diff hunks, up to the specified _<number>_
> + of lines, thereby fusing hunks that are close to each other.
> + Defaults to `diff.interHunkContext` or 0 if the config option
> + is unset.
Nice - we reuse the same text for all the "-p" commands.
> diff --git a/add-interactive.c b/add-interactive.c
> [...]
> @@ -98,6 +99,17 @@ void init_add_i_state(struct add_i_state *s, struct repository *r)
> repo_config_get_bool(r, "interactive.singlekey", &s->use_single_key);
> if (s->use_single_key)
> setbuf(stdin, NULL);
> +
> + if (add_p_opt->context != -1) {
> + if (add_p_opt->context < 0)
> + die(_("%s cannot be negative"), "--unified");
> + s->context = add_p_opt->context;
> + }
> + if (add_p_opt->interhunkcontext != -1) {
> + if (add_p_opt->interhunkcontext < 0)
> + die(_("%s cannot be negative"), "--inter-hunk-context");
> + s->interhunkcontext = add_p_opt->interhunkcontext;
> + }
Centralizing these checks like this is a good idea.
> @@ -1031,10 +1047,13 @@ static int run_diff(struct add_i_state *s, const struct pathspec *ps,
> if (count > 0) {
> struct child_process cmd = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
> > - strvec_pushl(&cmd.args, "git", "diff", "-p", "--cached",
> - oid_to_hex(!is_initial ? &oid :
> - s->r->hash_algo->empty_tree),
> - "--", NULL);
> + strvec_pushl(&cmd.args, "git", "diff", "-p", "--cached", NULL);
> + if (s->context != -1)
> + strvec_pushf(&cmd.args, "--unified=%i", s->context);
> + if (s->interhunkcontext != -1)
> + strvec_pushf(&cmd.args, "--inter-hunk-context=%i", s->interhunkcontext);
> + strvec_pushl(&cmd.args, oid_to_hex(!is_initial ? &oid :
> + s->r->hash_algo->empty_tree), "--", NULL);
This is good - we propagate the values we were given on the
command-line.
> diff --git a/builtin/checkout.c b/builtin/checkout.c
> [...]
> @@ -564,8 +575,13 @@ static int checkout_paths(const struct checkout_opts *opts,
> else
> BUG("either flag must have been set, worktree=%d, index=%d",
> opts->checkout_worktree, opts->checkout_index);
> - return !!run_add_p(the_repository, patch_mode, rev,
> - &opts->pathspec);
> + return !!run_add_p(the_repository, patch_mode, &add_p_opt,
> + rev, &opts->pathspec);
> + } else {
> + if (opts->patch_context != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--unified", "--patch");
> + if (opts->patch_interhunk_context != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--inter-hunk-context", "--patch");
> }
This does not catch "git checkout -U 7" because this code is only run
if we're checking out paths. I think you need to check this is
checkout_main() instead.
> diff --git a/builtin/stash.c b/builtin/stash.c
> [...]
> @@ -1826,8 +1831,15 @@ static int push_stash(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix,
> die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--pathspec-file-nul", "--pathspec-from-file");
> }
> > + if (!patch_mode) {
> + if (add_p_opt.context != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--unified", "--patch");
> + if (add_p_opt.interhunkcontext != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--inter-hunk-context", "--patch");
> + }
> +
This needs to die on invalid context values as "git stash" seems to
ignore the exit code of the subprocess that checks for negative values.
> @@ -1877,8 +1892,17 @@ static int save_stash(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix,
> stash_msg = strbuf_join_argv(&stash_msg_buf, argc, argv, ' ');
> > memset(&ps, 0, sizeof(ps));
> +
> + if (!patch_mode) {
> + if (add_p_opt.context != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--unified", "--patch");
> + if (add_p_opt.interhunkcontext != -1)
> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--inter-hunk-context", "--patch");
This needs to die on invalid context values as "git stash" seems to
ignore the exit code of the subprocess that checks for negative values.
> diff --git a/commit.h b/commit.h
> [...]
> #include "object.h"
> +#include "add-interactive.h"
> struct signature_check;
> struct strbuf;
Lets not add this. Instead lets just add a declaration for "struct
add_p_opt" like the ones in the context line so that we don't end up
including everything from add-interactive.h when we only need a single
struct declaration.
> diff --git a/parse-options.h b/parse-options.h
> [...]
> +#define OPT_DIFF_UNIFIED(v) OPT_INTEGER_F('U', "unified", v,
> N_("generate diffs with <n> lines context"), PARSE_OPT_NONEG)
This looks good
> +#define OPT_DIFF_INTERHUNK_CONTEXT(v) OPT_INTEGER_F(0, "inter-hunk-context", v, N_("show context between diff hunks up to the specified number of lines"), PARSE_OPT_NONEG)
This is a bit verbose but it matches what is in diff.c.
> diff --git a/t/t4032-diff-inter-hunk-context.sh b/t/t4032-diff-inter-hunk-context.sh
> index bada0cbd32f7..d5aad6e143a7 100755
> --- a/t/t4032-diff-inter-hunk-context.sh
> +++ b/t/t4032-diff-inter-hunk-context.sh
> @@ -47,6 +47,31 @@ t() {
> "
> }
> > +t_patch() {
> + use_config=
> + git config --unset diff.interHunkContext
> +
> + case $# in
> + 4) hunks=$4; cmd="add -p -U$3";;
> + 5) hunks=$5; cmd="add -p -U$3 --inter-hunk-context=$4";;
> + 6) hunks=$5; cmd="add -p -U$3"; git config diff.interHunkContext $4; use_config="(diff.interHunkContext=$4) ";;
> + esac
> + label="$use_config$cmd, $1 common $2"
> + file=f$1
> +
> + if ! test -f $file
> + then
> + f A $1 B >$file
> + git add $file
> + git commit -q -m. $file
> + f X $1 Y >$file
> + fi
> +
> + test_expect_success "$label: count hunks ($hunks)" "
> + test $(test_write_lines q | git $cmd $file | sed -n 's/^([0-9]*\/\([0-9]*\)) Stage this hunk.*/\1/p') = $hunks
> + "
> +}
> +
> cat <<EOF >expected.f1.0.1 || exit 1
> diff --git a/f1 b/f1
> --- a/f1
> @@ -107,6 +132,42 @@ t 3 lines 1 2 1 config
> t 9 lines 3 2 2 config
> t 9 lines 3 3 1 config
> > +# common lines ctx intrctx hunks
> +t_patch 1 line 0 2
> +t_patch 1 line 0 0 2
> +t_patch 1 line 0 1 1
> +t_patch 1 line 0 2 1
> +t_patch 1 line 1 1
> +
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 2
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 0 2
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 1 2
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 2 1
> +t_patch 2 lines 1 1
> +
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 2
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 0 2
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 1 1
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 2 1
> +
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 2
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 2 2
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 3 1
> +
> +# use diff.interHunkContext?
> +t_patch 1 line 0 0 2 config
> +t_patch 1 line 0 1 1 config
> +t_patch 1 line 0 2 1 config
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 3 1 config
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 0 2 config
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 1 2 config
> +t_patch 2 lines 0 2 1 config
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 0 2 config
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 1 1 config
> +t_patch 3 lines 1 2 1 config
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 2 2 config
> +t_patch 9 lines 3 3 1 config
> +
There are 29 tests here and yet more below. I think we can
get the test coverage we need much more efficiently with the following
added to t3701
for cmd in add checkout restore 'commit -m file'
do
test_expect_success "${cmd%% *} accepts -U and --inter-hunk-context" "
test_write_lines a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v >file &&
git add file &&
test_write_lines a b c d e F g h i j k l m n o p Q r s t u v >file &&
echo y | git -c diff.context=5 -c diff.interhunkcontext=1 \
$cmd -p -U 4 --inter-hunk-context 2 >actual &&
test_grep \"@@ -2,20 +2,20 @@\" actual
"
done
test_expect_success 'reset accepts -U and --inter-hunk-context' '
test_write_lines a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v >file &&
git commit -m file file &&
test_write_lines a b c d e F g h i j k l m n o p Q r s t u v >file &&
git add file &&
echo y | git -c diff.context=5 -c diff.interhunkcontext=1 \
reset -p -U 4 --inter-hunk-context 2 >actual &&
test_grep "@@ -2,20 +2,20 @@" actual
'
test_expect_success 'stash accepts -U and --inter-hunk-context' '
test_write_lines a b c d e F g h i j k l m n o p Q r s t u v >file &&
git commit -m file file &&
test_write_lines a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v >file &&
echo y | git -c diff.context=5 -c diff.interhunkcontext=1 \
stash -p -U 4 --inter-hunk-context 2 >actual &&
test_grep "@@ -2,20 +2,20 @@" actual
'
Those tests will fail if any of the commands that accept "-p" do not
accept "-U" or "--inter-hunk-context" or if command-line arguments do
not override the config settings. We should also add tests in t3701 to
check that invalid option combinations and values are rejected like so
for cmd in add checkout commit reset restore 'stash save' 'stash push'
do
test_expect_success "$cmd rejects invalid context options" "
test_must_fail git $cmd -p -U -3 2>actual &&
test_grep -e \"--unified cannot be negative\" actual &&
test_must_fail git $cmd -p --inter-hunk-context -3 2>actual &&
test_grep -e \"--inter-hunk-context cannot be negative\" actual &&
test_must_fail git $cmd -U 7 2>actual &&
test_grep -E \".--unified. requires .(--interactive/)?--patch.\" actual &&
test_must_fail git $cmd --inter-hunk-context 2 2>actual &&
test_grep -E \".--inter-hunk-context. requires .(--interactive/)?--patch.\" actual
"
done
The "checkout", "stash save" and "stash push" tests above currently
fail because the implementation does not implement those checks
properly.
With a few tweaks this series will be looking very good
Best Wishes
PhillipThere was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Phillip Wood wrote (reply to this): On 13/05/2025 14:52, Phillip Wood wrote:
>> diff --git a/builtin/stash.c b/builtin/stash.c
>> [...]
>> @@ -1826,8 +1831,15 @@ static int push_stash(int argc, const char >> **argv, const char *prefix,
>> die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--pathspec-file- >> nul", "--pathspec-from-file");
>> }
>> + if (!patch_mode) {
>> + if (add_p_opt.context != -1)
>> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--unified", "-- >> patch");
>> + if (add_p_opt.interhunkcontext != -1)
>> + die(_("the option '%s' requires '%s'"), "--inter-hunk- >> context", "--patch");
>> + }
>> +
> > This needs to die on invalid context values as "git stash" seems to
> ignore the exit code of the subprocess that checks for negative values.
Looking more closely the problem is that it quits if there are no changes to stash before validating -U or --inter-hunk-context. I think it should validate the options before checking if there is anything to stash.
Best Wishes
Phillip
There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, Leon Michalak wrote (reply to this): Hey, thanks for the thorough review Philip. I will properly digest
this when I get some free time, but I just wanted to say (I probably
should have mentioned this so my bad) that the reason I didn't change
to test just the singular command (yet, anyway) is that someone else
thought this was a good idea testing all of them, so I wasn't sure
whether to touch it or not in the end, and thought I'd just submit
this v2 and gather more opinions. Was this perhaps the wrong approach
though?There was a problem hiding this comment. On the Git mailing list, [email protected] wrote (reply to this): Hi Leon
On 13/05/2025 16:05, Leon Michalak wrote:
> Hey, thanks for the thorough review Philip. I will properly digest
> this when I get some free time, but I just wanted to say (I probably
> should have mentioned this so my bad) that the reason I didn't change
> to test just the singular command (yet, anyway) is that someone else
> thought this was a good idea testing all of them,
I'd missed that message - have you got a link to it please
> so I wasn't sure
> whether to touch it or not in the end, and thought I'd just submit
> this v2 and gather more opinions. Was this perhaps the wrong approach
> though?
If you get conflicting advise then it is a good idea to mention that in the cover letter and explain which option you went with and why.
Best Wishes
Phillip
|
||
| `--unified=<n>`:: | ||
| Generate diffs with _<n>_ lines of context. Defaults to `diff.context` | ||
| or 3 if the config option is unset. | ||
|
|
||
| `--inter-hunk-context=<n>`:: | ||
| Show the context between diff hunks, up to the specified _<number>_ | ||
| of lines, thereby fusing hunks that are close to each other. | ||
| Defaults to `diff.interHunkContext` or 0 if the config option | ||
| is unset. | ||
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On the Git mailing list, Leon Michalak wrote (reply to this):