On Tuesday, 10.07.2012 at 02:45 +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > That could of course automatically add -n to wdiff,... if it's really > needed.
It depends on your circumstances, but for use with colordiff it's
required in order to catch diffs which cross multiple lines. colordiff
processes each line as it reads it and thus the wdiff markers need to
appear on each line: that's what the -n option does; you can test this
by giving one of your test files a large paragraph of text which the
other lacks, compare the output of 'wdiff' against 'wdiff -n'. If your
changes are always small and reside within a single line, then 'wdiff'
and 'wdiff -n' return the same output.
Regarding the bug itself, I don't believe a separate colorwdiff is
required. I suggest a shell function instead of an alias, perhaps
something like this:
function wdiffc () { wdiff -n $@ | colordiff; }
That turns
wdiffc file1 file2
into
wdiff -n file1 file2 | colordiff
which works for me.
Is that what you're after, Christoph?
Dave.
--
Dave Ewart da...@sungate.co.uk, http://twitter.com/DaveEwart
All email from me is digitally signed, http://www.sungate.co.uk/
Fingerprint: AEC5 9360 0A35 7F66 66E9 82E4 9E10 6769 CD28 DA92
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
