Re: Patch upstream Git for Elisp diff hunk headings

["Óscar Fuentes" <ofv@wanadoo.es>]

Adam Spiers <emacs-devel@adamspiers.org> writes:

>     git_config diff.elisp.xfuncname "^(\\(.*)$"
>
> Indeed this is what Prot initially suggested in his original blog post 
> which sparked this discussion: 
>
>     https://protesilaos.com/codelog/2021-01-26-git-diff-hunk-elisp-org/
>
> While of course no one is claiming that this is technically correct in 
> all cases, I don't think I can actually recall ever seeing a single 
> instance of a top-level form which *was* indented.  So presumably it's 
> a good enough heuristic to be helpful in the vast majority of cases. 
> Or at least it's more likely to be right than a heuristic which 
> assumes that all top-level forms include "def" in the first symbol in 
> the form, since the latter obviously fails in many common scenarios 
> including the init files one mentioned above. 
>
> Would be grateful to hear other views on this.

Indeed, "^(\\(.*)$" is good enough IMHO, and I do not understand the
advantages of the second variant that Prot mentioned on his blog.