Home » Community » U++ community news and announcements » U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha"
|
|
|
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha" [message #60140 is a reply to message #60138] |
Wed, 13 September 2023 12:49 |
Tom1
Messages: 1279 Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Contributor |
|
|
mirek wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:34Tom1 wrote on Mon, 11 September 2023 15:38And another thing...
When using "Show git history for file..." for "plugin/tif/tifupp.cpp" and comparing the previous and current version, very large region of code seems to be changed at the first glance. However, in reality, the comparison function does not match the lines very well and there are just few changes to display. Please take a look.
Best regards,
Tom
There is a change in indentation. Should we ignore it? (That is not rethrical question, I really wonder whether we should... it is doable)
Mirek
Hi,
Yes, I see there are several indentation changes, but the real issue begins on line 904 "break;", where it completely loses sync. Then it re-synchronizes to "break;" on line 1001, within another switch. Do you get this same behavior?
I do not mind seeing the indentation changes, especially as they are so neatly presented inline. It is actually good to see why a file was updated, even if it just indentation. But the large portions of code (such as 904...) getting out of sync is a problem.
Best regards,
Tom
|
|
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha" [message #60141 is a reply to message #60140] |
Wed, 13 September 2023 13:40 |
|
mirek
Messages: 14155 Registered: November 2005
|
Ultimate Member |
|
|
Tom1 wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:49mirek wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:34Tom1 wrote on Mon, 11 September 2023 15:38And another thing...
When using "Show git history for file..." for "plugin/tif/tifupp.cpp" and comparing the previous and current version, very large region of code seems to be changed at the first glance. However, in reality, the comparison function does not match the lines very well and there are just few changes to display. Please take a look.
Best regards,
Tom
There is a change in indentation. Should we ignore it? (That is not rethrical question, I really wonder whether we should... it is doable)
Mirek
Hi,
Yes, I see there are several indentation changes, but the real issue begins on line 904 "break;", where it completely loses sync. Then it re-synchronizes to "break;" on line 1001, within another switch. Do you get this same behavior?
Tom
Yes, and I believe it works correctly. That break has different indentation, so it "synchronizes" (not that it is how it really works) on the first break that has the same indent. Which is on line 1001. (Please check whether I interpret it correctly...)
|
|
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha" [message #60142 is a reply to message #60141] |
Wed, 13 September 2023 14:43 |
Tom1
Messages: 1279 Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Contributor |
|
|
mirek wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 14:40Tom1 wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:49mirek wrote on Wed, 13 September 2023 12:34Tom1 wrote on Mon, 11 September 2023 15:38And another thing...
When using "Show git history for file..." for "plugin/tif/tifupp.cpp" and comparing the previous and current version, very large region of code seems to be changed at the first glance. However, in reality, the comparison function does not match the lines very well and there are just few changes to display. Please take a look.
Best regards,
Tom
There is a change in indentation. Should we ignore it? (That is not rethrical question, I really wonder whether we should... it is doable)
Mirek
Hi,
Yes, I see there are several indentation changes, but the real issue begins on line 904 "break;", where it completely loses sync. Then it re-synchronizes to "break;" on line 1001, within another switch. Do you get this same behavior?
Tom
Yes, and I believe it works correctly. That break has different indentation, so it "synchronizes" (not that it is how it really works) on the first break that has the same indent. Which is on line 1001. (Please check whether I interpret it correctly...)
Well, I guess it's just so complicated problem that there is no easy nor perfect solution. In this specific case the indentation is the cause for this readability issue, but it could be any change really that can cause similar 'loss of sync'. Probably not worth spending tens of hours, to make it find the minimal set of changed characters in optimal sequences and visualize accordingly.
I just wanted to point out that the current comparison on this file makes up an illusion that the file is all different now. It is really hard to see what the real changes are.
Best regards,
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: U++ 2023.2 "pre-alpha" [message #60172 is a reply to message #60160] |
Wed, 20 September 2023 20:15 |
Tom1
Messages: 1279 Registered: March 2007
|
Senior Contributor |
|
|
Hi Mirek,
CtrlCore/Win32DnD.cpp throws some RLOG()'s even with release. Is this necessary? :
Could be:
#define LLOG(x) // RLOG(x)
Best regards,
Tom
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Dec 04 17:07:47 CET 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01547 seconds
|