From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200304302032.h3UKW5pT018787@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: nmalloc documentation revisions
In-Reply-To: <7458-Wed30Apr2003210444+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> "from Eli Zaretskii
 at Apr 30, 2003 09:04:45 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 22:32:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:25:04 -0400
> > From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
> > 
> > Attached is a zip file (malldbg.zip) containing:
> > 
> >   The original malloc.txh (named malloco.txh)
> >   The revised nmalloc.txh (named nmalloc.txh)
> >   A diff file malltxh.dif
> > 
> > The dif file is larger than any, so I fail to see its usefulness.
> 
> That's because you reformatted malloc.txh while editing it.  You
> should never do that, since it makes the diffs much larger.  In this
> case, they are so large that they are impossible to read and review,
> at least for me.

This is to CBFalconer, and other potential patch posters:
FWIW, I agree. There were many changes in the first blocks that were
only white-space changes so I didn't bother to look further. I almost
did. But then real-world intruded. Sorry.

And note, if it had been only a .ZIP file I probably wouldn't have
looked at all. (So you did right posting the diff. As a
non-attachement!) (Personally, don't bother to post any attachments
(they are evil.), just post the links to them if they are so big that
a seperate download is necessary.)

> Also, please produce the diffs like this:
> 
>       diff -c malloc.txh nmalloc.txh
> 
> Note the "-c" switch--it's very important.

This is to anyone:
So "diff" compared to "diff -c" and "diff -u" generate very different
results?

(I just thought "diff" more or less defaulted to "diff -c". Oh
well.... I need to reread the man/info pages.)


Right,

							MartinS