From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: smerge-ediff "MINE" and "OTHER" monikers unhelpful Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:45:18 +0100 Message-ID: <87r4a1d6pt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <87zjowpn2s.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87a9gvnreg.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <8761ref7hy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1385577919 28909 80.91.229.3 (27 Nov 2013 18:45:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:45:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 27 19:45:24 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk72-0002jd-GV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:45:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37321 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk72-0003yG-6D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:45:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54628) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk6y-0003vJ-Id for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:45:21 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk6x-0000RQ-Dv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:45:20 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45115) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk6x-0000RM-BC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:45:19 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52291 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vlk6w-0001eg-V5; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 13:45:19 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 79F5FE0498; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:45:18 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Wed, 27 Nov 2013 12:37:58 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:165812 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > Of course, any tool is free top put the 2 in whichever order they > prefer. Maybe we should revisit the MINE/OTHER names used so far. > But whichever name we use there will need to also be present in > smerge-ediff. Whenever you use _meaning_-carrying names, they'll be wrong half of the time. Ediff got that right with A, B, and, uh, C? No idea (rarely use three-way conflicts). It's arbitrary what the first and the second _mean_, so you just put them first and second on screen and give them A and B as monikers. And since nobody would suspect that you have first B, then A, even omitting them from the mode lines works fine. The only reliable _meaning_ is, if at all, in the conflict markers. For a straightforward diff (rather than a conflict merge), again it's natural to have the original before the diff left, and the patched file right. If the user has to puzzle out how additional, differently named and actually _unrelated_ information relates to the buffer names, stuff becomes hard. I don't actually care all that much whether you want to make smerge-mode an intellectual challenge, but I'm using smerge-ediff alone all the time, and there "MINE" and "OTHER" are a clearly entirely unhelpful distraction. -- David Kastrup