Hello, > If you think about it, you find that it is very difficult to define what > "changed" means. Diff normally has delete, insert and change operators. > Applying that to a line of characters you can make a change in an > unlimited number of ways. Some define the optimal way to be the one > that has the lowest number of operators, but that often leads to a weird > display. E.g., when comparing "one two three four" with "one three two > four", what should be highlighted? Perhaps "wo three" and "hree two", > because that's the changed part of the text. Or "two" in both lines, as > it's deleted and inserted. Or delete "wo t" and insert "hree t"?
What is the difference between char-diff of two lines and normal diff of two files having one char at each line? A simple script doing :s/./&^M/g , comparing the results and highlighting original lines according to that result can do the work. However, I think the base of the problem is elsewhere: you can do the described comparison only if you can match exacly each line of file 1 to some line of file 2 (1:1 mapping). If not (for example three lines in file 1 replaced by seven lines in file 2), how can you tell which line should be compared with which? So, in general, this is 2D problem and can't be solved 100%. But this idea of char-diff can be useful in cases where the amount of changed lines are same in both actually compared hunks. And I must say I would like it very much in that cases (comparing various config files etc.). Milan -- Milan Vancura, Prague, Czech Republic, Europe --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---