From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#1183: 23.0.60; ediff-buffers is broken Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:48:06 -0700 Message-ID: <002501c93078$21bf8c60$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> References: <00a101c92fbf$998d19b0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> <00eb01c92fd0$1be49cc0$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> Reply-To: Drew Adams , 1183@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1224263447 9517 80.91.229.12 (17 Oct 2008 17:10:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 17:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, 'Michael Kifer' To: "'Stefan Monnier'" , <1183@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>, "'Eli Zaretskii'" Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 17 19:11:47 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kqsr6-0004cA-3N for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:11:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52102 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kqsq1-0005Lz-0t for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kqspw-0005LW-Aa for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:04 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kqspv-0005LK-Fw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60166 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kqspv-0005L3-6X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:03 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:48465) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kqspu-0002Tc-GL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:02 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m9HHA03J000382; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:10:00 -0700 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m9HGt5CL028743; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:55:05 -0700 X-Loop: don@donarmstrong.com Resent-From: "Drew Adams" Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:55:05 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: don@donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 1183 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 1183-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B1183.122426210527365 (code B ref 1183); Fri, 17 Oct 2008 16:55:05 +0000 Original-Received: (at 1183) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 17 Oct 2008 16:48:25 +0000 Original-Received: from rgminet01.oracle.com (rgminet01.oracle.com [148.87.113.118]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m9HGmMEv027359 for <1183@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:48:24 -0700 Original-Received: from agmgw2.us.oracle.com (agmgw2.us.oracle.com [152.68.180.213]) by rgminet01.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.4/Switch-3.1.6) with ESMTP id m9HGm55P013097; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:48:06 -0600 Original-Received: from acsmt701.oracle.com (acsmt701.oracle.com [141.146.40.71]) by agmgw2.us.oracle.com (Switch-3.2.0/Switch-3.2.0) with ESMTP id m9HGm514008715; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 10:48:05 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/141.144.60.60) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:48:05 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: AckwdbJz5UZcLLGvTDywNPDOoTu9VwAAMNhw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAQAAAAI= X-Whitelist: TRUE X-Whitelist: TRUE X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:10:03 -0400 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:21623 Archived-At: > > 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. It's OK for ediff-buffers to be more refined than before, to be able to take into account current encodings etc. for the buffers, but it should inform the user of the situation and let the user, if s?he wants, proceed to compare the buffers using the same encodings etc. - or whatever is necessary to see the actual textual differences, beyond encoding etc. differences. The same behavior as previously (Emacs 22) should be available as a user choice if the only differences are line endings, encodings, etc. And such differences as line endings should at least be treated as differences and shown as such. It's no good to just say the buffers are different, without offering more info than that. IOW, ediff-buffers should be at least as useful as it was before. Adding coding diffs should be a plus, not a minus. Simply punting, showing a single giant diff with no possible refinement and no explanation, is not helpful. > > We could also let them compare equal, but display a message to the > > effect that the buffers define different encoding for saving them to > > files. Opinions? > > That would be fine, indeed. Fine, but not enough. If a user wants to see the textual differences between the two buffers, the info that the encodings are different is not helpful enough to get the job done. In the case described, there are real textual differences (an added Lisp sexp), and ediff-buffers is not at all helpful in showing them.