Dan Eble <d...@faithful.be> writes: > On Jan 25, 2020, at 07:26, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> >> - Interval hex = head->extent (common_[X_AXIS], X_AXIS); >> + Interval head_ext = head->extent (common_[X_AXIS], X_AXIS); > ... >> >> That last part applies part of a patch from an unrelated issue of >> Han-Wen. Please don't do stuff like that, if necessary using > > It does not apply a patch from Han-Wen. It necessarily renames that > variable prior to a scripted replacement of "hex" with "std::hex". I > wonder whether the task would have been easier if I had used a > different name for the variable.
Well, then I'd have had something looking like an actual conflict in my rejected parts of the patches. It would likely have been a bit more work to resolve and quite a bit less to hunt down. > I don't understand from this description exactly problem you > experienced and where in my development process you would have wanted > me to use that command. It wasn't clear that this partial overlap with a patch of Han-Wen was independently arrived at and manually created rather than an artifact. The problem I experienced is that a partially applying patch apparently was partly applied previously. That this was not a problem of what I was doing took some time to find out. Of course, resetting would indeed not have helped since my guess at the discrepancy's origin was wrong. -- David Kastrup