git/t/t4015-diff-whitespace.sh

2095 строки
49 KiB
Bash
Исходник Обычный вид История

#!/bin/sh
#
# Copyright (c) 2006 Johannes E. Schindelin
#
test_description='Test special whitespace in diff engine.
'
. ./test-lib.sh
. "$TEST_DIRECTORY"/diff-lib.sh
test_expect_success "Ray Lehtiniemi's example" '
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
do {
nothing;
} while (0);
EOF
git update-index --add x &&
old_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$old_hash_x") &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
do
{
nothing;
}
while (0);
EOF
new_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$new_hash_x") &&
cat <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/x
index $before..$after 100644
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
-do {
+do
+{
nothing;
-} while (0);
+}
+while (0);
EOF
git diff >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff -w >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff -b >out &&
test_cmp expect out
'
test_expect_success 'another test, without options' '
tr Q "\015" <<-\EOF >x &&
whitespace at beginning
whitespace change
whitespace in the middle
whitespace at end
unchanged line
CR at endQ
EOF
git update-index x &&
old_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$old_hash_x") &&
tr "_" " " <<-\EOF >x &&
_ whitespace at beginning
whitespace change
white space in the middle
whitespace at end__
unchanged line
CR at end
EOF
new_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$new_hash_x") &&
tr "Q_" "\015 " <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/x
index $before..$after 100644
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-whitespace at beginning
-whitespace change
-whitespace in the middle
-whitespace at end
+ whitespace at beginning
+whitespace change
+white space in the middle
+whitespace at end__
unchanged line
-CR at endQ
+CR at end
EOF
git diff >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff -w >out &&
test_must_be_empty out &&
git diff -w -b >out &&
test_must_be_empty out &&
git diff -w --ignore-space-at-eol >out &&
test_must_be_empty out &&
git diff -w -b --ignore-space-at-eol >out &&
test_must_be_empty out &&
git diff -w --ignore-cr-at-eol >out &&
test_must_be_empty out &&
tr "Q_" "\015 " <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/x
index $before..$after 100644
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-whitespace at beginning
+_ whitespace at beginning
whitespace change
-whitespace in the middle
+white space in the middle
whitespace at end__
unchanged line
CR at end
EOF
git diff -b >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff -b --ignore-space-at-eol >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff -b --ignore-cr-at-eol >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
tr "Q_" "\015 " <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/x
index $before..$after 100644
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-whitespace at beginning
-whitespace change
-whitespace in the middle
+_ whitespace at beginning
+whitespace change
+white space in the middle
whitespace at end__
unchanged line
CR at end
EOF
git diff --ignore-space-at-eol >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
git diff --ignore-space-at-eol --ignore-cr-at-eol >out &&
test_cmp expect out &&
tr "Q_" "\015 " <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/x
index_$before..$after 100644
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
-whitespace at beginning
-whitespace change
-whitespace in the middle
-whitespace at end
+_ whitespace at beginning
+whitespace_ _change
+white space in the middle
+whitespace at end__
unchanged line
CR at end
EOF
git diff --ignore-cr-at-eol >out &&
test_cmp expect out
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: only new lines' '
test_seq 5 >x &&
git update-index x &&
test_seq 5 | sed "/3/i\\
" >x &&
git diff --ignore-blank-lines >out &&
test_must_be_empty out
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: only new lines with space' '
test_seq 5 >x &&
git update-index x &&
test_seq 5 | sed "/3/i\\
" >x &&
git diff -w --ignore-blank-lines >out &&
test_must_be_empty out
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: after change' '
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
EOF
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
EOF
git diff --inter-hunk-context=100 --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
+change
+
1
2
-
3
4
5
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: before change' '
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
EOF
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
change
EOF
git diff --inter-hunk-context=100 --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -4,5 +4,7 @@
3
4
5
+
6
7
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: between changes' '
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
EOF
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
change
EOF
git diff --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
+change
1
2
+
3
4
5
@@ -8,5 +8,7 @@
6
7
8
+
9
10
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: between changes (with interhunkctx)' '
test_seq 10 >x &&
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
change
EOF
git diff --inter-hunk-context=2 --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,10 +1,15 @@
+change
1
2
+
3
4
5
+
6
7
8
9
+
10
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: scattered spaces' '
test_seq 10 >x &&
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
change
EOF
git diff --inter-hunk-context=4 --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+change
1
2
3
@@ -8,3 +15,4 @@
8
9
10
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: spaces coalesce' '
test_seq 6 >x &&
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
6
change
EOF
git diff --inter-hunk-context=4 --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,6 +1,11 @@
+change
1
2
3
+
4
+
5
+
6
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'ignore-blank-lines: mix changes and blank lines' '
test_seq 16 >x &&
git update-index x &&
cat <<-\EOF >x &&
change
1
2
3
4
5
change
6
7
8
9
10
11
change
12
13
14
15
16
change
EOF
git diff --ignore-blank-lines >out.tmp &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
diff --git a/x b/x
--- a/x
+++ b/x
@@ -1,8 +1,11 @@
+change
1
2
+
3
4
5
+change
6
7
8
@@ -9,8 +13,11 @@
9
10
11
+change
12
13
14
+
15
16
+change
EOF
compare_diff_patch expected out.tmp
'
test_expect_success 'check mixed spaces and tabs in indent' '
# This is indented with SP HT SP.
echo " foo();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check >check &&
grep "space before tab in indent" check
'
test_expect_success 'check mixed tabs and spaces in indent' '
# This is indented with HT SP HT.
echo " foo();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check >check &&
grep "space before tab in indent" check
'
test_expect_success 'check with no whitespace errors' '
git commit -m "snapshot" &&
echo "foo();" >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check with trailing whitespace' '
echo "foo(); " >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check with space before tab in indent' '
# indent has space followed by hard tab
echo " foo();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success '--check and --exit-code are not exclusive' '
git checkout x &&
git diff --check --exit-code
'
test_expect_success '--check and --quiet are not exclusive' '
git diff --check --quiet
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with no whitespace errors' '
echo "foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
git diff --cached --check
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with trailing whitespace' '
echo "foo(); " >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff --cached --check
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with space before tab in indent' '
# indent has space followed by hard tab
echo " foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff --cached --check
'
test_expect_success 'check with no whitespace errors (diff-index)' '
echo "foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
git diff-index --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with trailing whitespace (diff-index)' '
echo "foo(); " >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff-index --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with space before tab in indent (diff-index)' '
# indent has space followed by hard tab
echo " foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff-index --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with no whitespace errors (diff-index)' '
echo "foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
git diff-index --cached --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with trailing whitespace (diff-index)' '
echo "foo(); " >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff-index --cached --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check staged with space before tab in indent (diff-index)' '
# indent has space followed by hard tab
echo " foo();" >x &&
git add x &&
test_must_fail git diff-index --cached --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with no whitespace errors (diff-tree)' '
echo "foo();" >x &&
git commit -m "new commit" x &&
git diff-tree --check HEAD^ HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with trailing whitespace (diff-tree)' '
echo "foo(); " >x &&
git commit -m "another commit" x &&
test_must_fail git diff-tree --check HEAD^ HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with space before tab in indent (diff-tree)' '
# indent has space followed by hard tab
echo " foo();" >x &&
git commit -m "yet another" x &&
test_must_fail git diff-tree --check HEAD^ HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check with ignored trailing whitespace attr (diff-tree)' '
test_when_finished "git reset --hard HEAD^" &&
# create a whitespace error that should be ignored
echo "* -whitespace" >.gitattributes &&
git add .gitattributes &&
echo "foo(); " >x &&
git add x &&
git commit -m "add trailing space" &&
# with a worktree diff-tree ignores the whitespace error
git diff-tree --root --check HEAD &&
# without a worktree diff-tree still ignores the whitespace error
git -C .git diff-tree --root --check HEAD
'
test_expect_success 'check trailing whitespace (trailing-space: off)' '
git config core.whitespace "-trailing-space" &&
echo "foo (); " >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check trailing whitespace (trailing-space: on)' '
git config core.whitespace "trailing-space" &&
echo "foo (); " >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check space before tab in indent (space-before-tab: off)' '
# indent contains space followed by HT
git config core.whitespace "-space-before-tab" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check space before tab in indent (space-before-tab: on)' '
# indent contains space followed by HT
git config core.whitespace "space-before-tab" &&
echo " foo (); " >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check spaces as indentation (indent-with-non-tab: off)' '
git config core.whitespace "-indent-with-non-tab" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check spaces as indentation (indent-with-non-tab: on)' '
git config core.whitespace "indent-with-non-tab" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'ditto, but tabwidth=9' '
git config core.whitespace "indent-with-non-tab,tabwidth=9" &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tabs and spaces as indentation (indent-with-non-tab: on)' '
git config core.whitespace "indent-with-non-tab" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'ditto, but tabwidth=10' '
git config core.whitespace "indent-with-non-tab,tabwidth=10" &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'ditto, but tabwidth=20' '
git config core.whitespace "indent-with-non-tab,tabwidth=20" &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tabs as indentation (tab-in-indent: off)' '
git config core.whitespace "-tab-in-indent" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tabs as indentation (tab-in-indent: on)' '
git config core.whitespace "tab-in-indent" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tabs and spaces as indentation (tab-in-indent: on)' '
git config core.whitespace "tab-in-indent" &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'ditto, but tabwidth=1 (must be irrelevant)' '
git config core.whitespace "tab-in-indent,tabwidth=1" &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tab-in-indent and indent-with-non-tab conflict' '
git config core.whitespace "tab-in-indent,indent-with-non-tab" &&
echo "foo ();" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'check tab-in-indent excluded from wildcard whitespace attribute' '
git config --unset core.whitespace &&
echo "x whitespace" >.gitattributes &&
echo " foo ();" >x &&
git diff --check &&
rm -f .gitattributes
'
test_expect_success 'line numbers in --check output are correct' '
echo "" >x &&
echo "foo(); " >>x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check >check &&
grep "x:2:" check
'
test_expect_success 'checkdiff detects new trailing blank lines (1)' '
echo "foo();" >x &&
echo "" >>x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check >check &&
grep "new blank line" check
'
test_expect_success 'checkdiff detects new trailing blank lines (2)' '
test_write_lines a b "" "" >x &&
git add x &&
test_write_lines a "" "" "" "" >x &&
test_must_fail git diff --check >check &&
grep "new blank line" check
'
test_expect_success 'checkdiff allows new blank lines' '
git checkout x &&
mv x y &&
(
echo "/* This is new */" &&
echo "" &&
cat y
) >x &&
git diff --check
'
test_expect_success 'whitespace-only changes not reported' '
git reset --hard &&
echo >x "hello world" &&
git add x &&
git commit -m "hello 1" &&
echo >x "hello world" &&
git diff -b >actual &&
tests: use 'test_must_be_empty' instead of 'test_cmp <empty> <out>' Using 'test_must_be_empty' is shorter and more idiomatic than >empty && test_cmp empty out as it saves the creation of an empty file. Furthermore, sometimes the expected empty file doesn't have such a descriptive name like 'empty', and its creation is far away from the place where it's finally used for comparison (e.g. in 't7600-merge.sh', where two expected empty files are created in the 'setup' test, but are used only about 500 lines later). These cases were found by instrumenting 'test_cmp' to error out the test script when it's used to compare empty files, and then converted manually. Note that even after this patch there still remain a lot of cases where we use 'test_cmp' to check empty files: - Sometimes the expected output is not hard-coded in the test, but 'test_cmp' is used to ensure that two similar git commands produce the same output, and that output happens to be empty, e.g. the test 'submodule update --merge - ignores --merge for new submodules' in 't7406-submodule-update.sh'. - Repetitive common tasks, including preparing the expected results and running 'test_cmp', are often extracted into a helper function, and some of this helper's callsites expect no output. - For the same reason as above, the whole 'test_expect_success' block is within a helper function, e.g. in 't3070-wildmatch.sh'. - Or 'test_cmp' is invoked in a loop, e.g. the test 'cvs update (-p)' in 't9400-git-cvsserver-server.sh'. Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-20 00:57:25 +03:00
test_must_be_empty actual
'
test_expect_success 'whitespace-only changes reported across renames' '
git reset --hard &&
for i in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9; do echo "$i$i$i$i$i$i"; done >x &&
git add x &&
hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$hash_x") &&
git commit -m "base" &&
sed -e "5s/^/ /" x >z &&
git rm x &&
git add z &&
hash_z=$(git hash-object z) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$hash_z") &&
git diff -w -M --cached >actual.raw &&
sed -e "/^similarity index /s/[0-9][0-9]*/NUM/" actual.raw >actual &&
cat <<-EOF >expect &&
diff --git a/x b/z
similarity index NUM%
rename from x
rename to z
index $before..$after 100644
EOF
test_cmp expect actual
'
cat >expected <<\EOF
diff --git a/empty b/void
similarity index 100%
rename from empty
rename to void
EOF
test_expect_success 'rename empty' '
git reset --hard &&
>empty &&
git add empty &&
git commit -m empty &&
git mv empty void &&
git diff -w --cached -M >current &&
test_cmp expected current
'
test_expect_success 'combined diff with autocrlf conversion' '
git reset --hard &&
echo >x hello &&
git commit -m "one side" x &&
git checkout HEAD^ &&
echo >x goodbye &&
git commit -m "the other side" x &&
git config core.autocrlf true &&
test_must_fail git merge master &&
git diff >actual.raw &&
sed -e "1,/^@@@/d" actual.raw >actual &&
! grep "^-" actual
'
# Start testing the colored format for whitespace checks
test_expect_success 'setup diff colors' '
git config color.diff.plain normal &&
git config color.diff.meta bold &&
git config color.diff.frag cyan &&
git config color.diff.func normal &&
git config color.diff.old red &&
git config color.diff.new green &&
git config color.diff.commit yellow &&
git config color.diff.whitespace blue &&
git config core.autocrlf false
'
test_expect_success 'diff that introduces a line with only tabs' '
git config core.whitespace blank-at-eol &&
git reset --hard &&
echo "test" >x &&
old_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$old_hash_x") &&
git commit -m "initial" x &&
echo "{NTN}" | tr "NT" "\n\t" >>x &&
new_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$new_hash_x") &&
git diff --color >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
cat >expected <<-EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/x b/x<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before..$after 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/x<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/x<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1 +1,4 @@<RESET>
test<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>{<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>}<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected current
'
test_expect_success 'diff that introduces and removes ws breakages' '
git reset --hard &&
{
echo "0. blank-at-eol " &&
echo "1. blank-at-eol "
} >x &&
old_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$old_hash_x") &&
git commit -a --allow-empty -m preimage &&
{
echo "0. blank-at-eol " &&
echo "1. still-blank-at-eol " &&
echo "2. and a new line "
} >x &&
new_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$new_hash_x") &&
git diff --color >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
cat >expected <<-EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/x b/x<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before..$after 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/x<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/x<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@<RESET>
0. blank-at-eol <RESET>
<RED>-1. blank-at-eol <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>1. still-blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>2. and a new line<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected current
'
test_expect_success 'ws-error-highlight test setup' '
git reset --hard &&
{
echo "0. blank-at-eol " &&
echo "1. blank-at-eol "
} >x &&
old_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
before=$(git rev-parse --short "$old_hash_x") &&
git commit -a --allow-empty -m preimage &&
{
echo "0. blank-at-eol " &&
echo "1. still-blank-at-eol " &&
echo "2. and a new line "
} >x &&
new_hash_x=$(git hash-object x) &&
after=$(git rev-parse --short "$new_hash_x") &&
cat >expect.default-old <<-EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/x b/x<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before..$after 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/x<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/x<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@<RESET>
0. blank-at-eol <RESET>
<RED>-<RESET><RED>1. blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>1. still-blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>2. and a new line<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
EOF
cat >expect.all <<-EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/x b/x<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before..$after 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/x<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/x<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@<RESET>
<RESET>0. blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<RED>-<RESET><RED>1. blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>1. still-blank-at-eol<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>2. and a new line<RESET><BLUE> <RESET>
EOF
cat >expect.none <<-EOF
<BOLD>diff --git a/x b/x<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before..$after 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/x<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/x<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@<RESET>
0. blank-at-eol <RESET>
<RED>-1. blank-at-eol <RESET>
<GREEN>+1. still-blank-at-eol <RESET>
<GREEN>+2. and a new line <RESET>
EOF
'
test_expect_success 'test --ws-error-highlight option' '
git diff --color --ws-error-highlight=default,old >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.default-old current &&
git diff --color --ws-error-highlight=all >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.all current &&
git diff --color --ws-error-highlight=none >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.none current
'
test_expect_success 'test diff.wsErrorHighlight config' '
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=default,old diff --color >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.default-old current &&
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=all diff --color >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.all current &&
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=none diff --color >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.none current
'
test_expect_success 'option overrides diff.wsErrorHighlight' '
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=none \
diff --color --ws-error-highlight=default,old >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.default-old current &&
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=default \
diff --color --ws-error-highlight=all >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.all current &&
git -c diff.wsErrorHighlight=all \
diff --color --ws-error-highlight=none >current.raw &&
test_decode_color <current.raw >current &&
test_cmp expect.none current
'
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
test_expect_success 'detect moved code, complete file' '
git reset --hard &&
cat <<-\EOF >test.c &&
#include<stdio.h>
main()
{
printf("Hello World");
}
EOF
git add test.c &&
git commit -m "add main function" &&
file=$(git rev-parse --short HEAD:test.c) &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
git mv test.c main.c &&
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "normal red" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "normal green" &&
git diff HEAD --color-moved=zebra --color --no-renames >actual.raw &&
test_decode_color <actual.raw >actual &&
cat >expected <<-EOF &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>diff --git a/main.c b/main.c<RESET>
<BOLD>new file mode 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>index 0000000..$file<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>--- /dev/null<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/main.c<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>#include<stdio.h><RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>main()<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>{<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>printf("Hello World");<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>}<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/test.c b/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>deleted file mode 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>index $file..0000000<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>--- a/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ /dev/null<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@<RESET>
<BRED>-#include<stdio.h><RESET>
<BRED>-main()<RESET>
<BRED>-{<RESET>
<BRED>-printf("Hello World");<RESET>
<BRED>-}<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'detect malicious moved code, inside file' '
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "normal red" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "normal green" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternative "blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternative "yellow" &&
git reset --hard &&
cat <<-\EOF >main.c &&
#include<stdio.h>
int stuff()
{
printf("Hello ");
printf("World\n");
}
int secure_foo(struct user *u)
{
if (!u->is_allowed_foo)
return;
foo(u);
}
int main()
{
foo();
}
EOF
cat <<-\EOF >test.c &&
#include<stdio.h>
int bar()
{
printf("Hello World, but different\n");
}
int another_function()
{
bar();
}
EOF
git add main.c test.c &&
git commit -m "add main and test file" &&
before_main=$(git rev-parse --short HEAD:main.c) &&
before_test=$(git rev-parse --short HEAD:test.c) &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
cat <<-\EOF >main.c &&
#include<stdio.h>
int stuff()
{
printf("Hello ");
printf("World\n");
}
int main()
{
foo();
}
EOF
cat <<-\EOF >test.c &&
#include<stdio.h>
int bar()
{
printf("Hello World, but different\n");
}
int secure_foo(struct user *u)
{
foo(u);
if (!u->is_allowed_foo)
return;
}
int another_function()
{
bar();
}
EOF
hash_main=$(git hash-object main.c) &&
after_main=$(git rev-parse --short "$hash_main") &&
hash_test=$(git hash-object test.c) &&
after_test=$(git rev-parse --short "$hash_test") &&
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved=zebra --color >actual.raw &&
test_decode_color <actual.raw >actual &&
cat <<-EOF >expected &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>diff --git a/main.c b/main.c<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before_main..$after_main 100644<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>--- a/main.c<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/main.c<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -5,13 +5,6 @@<RESET> <RESET>printf("Hello ");<RESET>
printf("World\n");<RESET>
}<RESET>
<RESET>
<BRED>-int secure_foo(struct user *u)<RESET>
<BRED>-{<RESET>
<BLUE>-if (!u->is_allowed_foo)<RESET>
<BLUE>-return;<RESET>
<RED>-foo(u);<RESET>
<RED>-}<RESET>
<RED>-<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
int main()<RESET>
{<RESET>
foo();<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/test.c b/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before_test..$after_test 100644<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BOLD>--- a/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/test.c<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -4,6 +4,13 @@<RESET> <RESET>int bar()<RESET>
printf("Hello World, but different\n");<RESET>
}<RESET>
<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>int secure_foo(struct user *u)<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>{<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>foo(u);<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>if (!u->is_allowed_foo)<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>return;<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>}<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
int another_function()<RESET>
{<RESET>
bar();<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'plain moved code, inside file' '
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "normal red" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "normal green" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternative "blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternative "yellow" &&
# needs previous test as setup
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved=plain --color >actual.raw &&
test_decode_color <actual.raw >actual &&
cat <<-EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/main.c b/main.c<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before_main..$after_main 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/main.c<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/main.c<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -5,13 +5,6 @@<RESET> <RESET>printf("Hello ");<RESET>
printf("World\n");<RESET>
}<RESET>
<RESET>
<BRED>-int secure_foo(struct user *u)<RESET>
<BRED>-{<RESET>
<BRED>-if (!u->is_allowed_foo)<RESET>
<BRED>-return;<RESET>
<BRED>-foo(u);<RESET>
<BRED>-}<RESET>
<BRED>-<RESET>
int main()<RESET>
{<RESET>
foo();<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/test.c b/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>index $before_test..$after_test 100644<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/test.c<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/test.c<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -4,6 +4,13 @@<RESET> <RESET>int bar()<RESET>
printf("Hello World, but different\n");<RESET>
}<RESET>
<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>int secure_foo(struct user *u)<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>{<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>foo(u);<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>if (!u->is_allowed_foo)<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>return;<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET><BGREEN>}<RESET>
<BGREEN>+<RESET>
int another_function()<RESET>
{<RESET>
bar();<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'detect blocks of moved code' '
git reset --hard &&
cat <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
long line 1
long line 2
long line 3
line 4
line 5
line 6
line 7
line 8
line 9
line 10
line 11
line 12
line 13
long line 14
long line 15
long line 16
EOF
git add lines.txt &&
git commit -m "add poetry" &&
cat <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
line 4
line 5
line 6
line 7
line 8
line 9
long line 1
long line 2
long line 3
long line 14
long line 15
long line 16
line 10
line 11
line 12
line 13
EOF
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternative "blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternative "yellow" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedDimmed "normal magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedDimmed "normal cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal yellow" &&
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved=blocks --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 1<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 2<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
line 6<RESET>
line 7<RESET>
line 8<RESET>
line 9<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 1<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 2<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 3<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 14<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 15<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 16<RESET>
line 10<RESET>
line 11<RESET>
line 12<RESET>
line 13<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 14<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 15<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 16<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'detect permutations inside moved code -- dimmed-zebra' '
# reuse setup from test before!
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternative "blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternative "yellow" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedDimmed "normal magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedDimmed "normal cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal yellow" &&
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved=dimmed-zebra --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 1<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 2<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
line 6<RESET>
line 7<RESET>
line 8<RESET>
line 9<RESET>
<BCYAN>+<RESET><BCYAN>long line 1<RESET>
<BCYAN>+<RESET><BCYAN>long line 2<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 3<RESET>
<YELLOW>+<RESET><YELLOW>long line 14<RESET>
<BYELLOW>+<RESET><BYELLOW>long line 15<RESET>
<BYELLOW>+<RESET><BYELLOW>long line 16<RESET>
line 10<RESET>
line 11<RESET>
line 12<RESET>
line 13<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 14<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 15<RESET>
<BMAGENTA>-long line 16<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'cmd option assumes configured colored-moved' '
test_config color.diff.oldMoved "magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMoved "cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternative "blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternative "yellow" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedDimmed "normal magenta" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedDimmed "normal cyan" &&
test_config color.diff.oldMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal blue" &&
test_config color.diff.newMovedAlternativeDimmed "normal yellow" &&
test_config diff.colorMoved zebra &&
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 1<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 2<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
line 6<RESET>
line 7<RESET>
line 8<RESET>
line 9<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 1<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 2<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 3<RESET>
<YELLOW>+<RESET><YELLOW>long line 14<RESET>
<YELLOW>+<RESET><YELLOW>long line 15<RESET>
<YELLOW>+<RESET><YELLOW>long line 16<RESET>
line 10<RESET>
line 11<RESET>
line 12<RESET>
line 13<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 14<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 15<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 16<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
test_expect_success 'no effect from --color-moved with --word-diff' '
cat <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry.
EOF
git add text.txt &&
git commit -a -m "clean state" &&
cat <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
simply Lorem Ipsum dummy is text of the typesetting and printing industry.
EOF
git diff --color-moved --word-diff >actual &&
git diff --word-diff >expect &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'set up whitespace tests' '
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
git reset --hard &&
# Note that these lines have no leading or trailing whitespace.
cat <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
line 5
long line 6
long line 7
long line 8
long line 9
EOF
git add lines.txt &&
git commit -m "add poetry" &&
git config color.diff.oldMoved "magenta" &&
git config color.diff.newMoved "cyan"
'
test_expect_success 'move detection ignoring whitespace ' '
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
Qlong line 6
Qlong line 7
Qlong line 8
Qchanged long line 9
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
line 5
EOF
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET> <GREEN>long line 6<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET> <GREEN>long line 7<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET> <GREEN>long line 8<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET> <GREEN>changed long line 9<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<RED>-long line 6<RESET>
<RED>-long line 7<RESET>
<RED>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
EOF
test_cmp expected actual &&
diff.c: decouple white space treatment from move detection algorithm In the original implementation of the move detection logic the choice for ignoring white space changes is the same for the move detection as it is for the regular diff. Some cases came up where different treatment would have been nice. Allow the user to specify that white space should be ignored differently during detection of moved lines than during generation of added and removed lines. This is done by providing analogs to the --ignore-space-at-eol, -b, and -w options by introducing the option --color-moved-ws=<modes> with the modes named "ignore-space-at-eol", "ignore-space-change" and "ignore-all-space", which is used only during the move detection phase. As we change the default, we'll adjust the tests. For now we do not infer any options to treat white spaces in the move detection from the generic white space options given to diff. This can be tuned later to reasonable default. As we plan on adding more white space related options in a later patch, that interferes with the current white space options, use a flag field and clamp it down to XDF_WHITESPACE_FLAGS, as that (a) allows to easily check at parse time if we give invalid combinations and (b) can reuse parts of this patch. By having the white space treatment in its own option, we'll also make it easier for a later patch to have an config option for spaces in the move detection. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-17 02:05:40 +03:00
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color \
--color-moved-ws=ignore-all-space >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET> <CYAN>long line 6<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET> <CYAN>long line 7<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET> <CYAN>long line 8<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET> <GREEN>changed long line 9<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 6<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 7<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'move detection ignoring whitespace changes' '
git reset --hard &&
# Lines 6-8 have a space change, but 9 is new whitespace
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
longQline 6
longQline 7
longQline 8
long liQne 9
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
line 5
EOF
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 6<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 7<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 8<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long li ne 9<RESET>
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<RED>-long line 6<RESET>
<RED>-long line 7<RESET>
<RED>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual &&
diff.c: decouple white space treatment from move detection algorithm In the original implementation of the move detection logic the choice for ignoring white space changes is the same for the move detection as it is for the regular diff. Some cases came up where different treatment would have been nice. Allow the user to specify that white space should be ignored differently during detection of moved lines than during generation of added and removed lines. This is done by providing analogs to the --ignore-space-at-eol, -b, and -w options by introducing the option --color-moved-ws=<modes> with the modes named "ignore-space-at-eol", "ignore-space-change" and "ignore-all-space", which is used only during the move detection phase. As we change the default, we'll adjust the tests. For now we do not infer any options to treat white spaces in the move detection from the generic white space options given to diff. This can be tuned later to reasonable default. As we plan on adding more white space related options in a later patch, that interferes with the current white space options, use a flag field and clamp it down to XDF_WHITESPACE_FLAGS, as that (a) allows to easily check at parse time if we give invalid combinations and (b) can reuse parts of this patch. By having the white space treatment in its own option, we'll also make it easier for a later patch to have an config option for spaces in the move detection. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-17 02:05:40 +03:00
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color \
--color-moved-ws=ignore-space-change >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 6<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 7<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 8<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long li ne 9<RESET>
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 6<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 7<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
diff: fix whitespace-skipping with --color-moved The code for handling whitespace with --color-moved represents partial strings as a pair of pointers. There are two possible conventions for the end pointer: 1. It points to the byte right after the end of the string. 2. It points to the final byte of the string. But we seem to use both conventions in the code: a. we assign the initial pointers from the NUL-terminated string using (1) b. we eat trailing whitespace by checking the second pointer for isspace(), which needs (2) c. the next_byte() function checks for end-of-string with "if (cp > endp)", which is (2) d. in next_byte() we skip past internal whitespace with "while (cp < end)", which is (1) This creates fewer bugs than you might think, because there are some subtle interactions. Because of (a) and (c), we always return the NUL-terminator from next_byte(). But all of the callers of next_byte() happen to handle that gracefully. Because of the mismatch between (d) and (c), next_byte() could accidentally return a whitespace character right at endp. But because of the interaction of (a) and (b), we fail to actually chomp trailing whitespace, meaning our endp _always_ points to a NUL, canceling out the problem. But that does leave (b) as a real bug: when ignoring whitespace only at the end-of-line, we don't correctly trim it, and fail to match up lines. We can fix the whole thing by moving consistently to one convention. Since convention (1) is idiomatic in our code base, we'll pick that one. The existing "-w" and "-b" tests continue to pass, and a new "--ignore-space-at-eol" shows off the breakage we're fixing. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-10-19 23:29:26 +03:00
test_expect_success 'move detection ignoring whitespace at eol' '
git reset --hard &&
# Lines 6-9 have new eol whitespace, but 9 also has it in the middle
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >lines.txt &&
long line 6Q
long line 7Q
long line 8Q
longQline 9Q
line 1
line 2
line 3
line 4
line 5
EOF
# avoid cluttering the output with complaints about our eol whitespace
test_config core.whitespace -blank-at-eol &&
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
diff: fix whitespace-skipping with --color-moved The code for handling whitespace with --color-moved represents partial strings as a pair of pointers. There are two possible conventions for the end pointer: 1. It points to the byte right after the end of the string. 2. It points to the final byte of the string. But we seem to use both conventions in the code: a. we assign the initial pointers from the NUL-terminated string using (1) b. we eat trailing whitespace by checking the second pointer for isspace(), which needs (2) c. the next_byte() function checks for end-of-string with "if (cp > endp)", which is (2) d. in next_byte() we skip past internal whitespace with "while (cp < end)", which is (1) This creates fewer bugs than you might think, because there are some subtle interactions. Because of (a) and (c), we always return the NUL-terminator from next_byte(). But all of the callers of next_byte() happen to handle that gracefully. Because of the mismatch between (d) and (c), next_byte() could accidentally return a whitespace character right at endp. But because of the interaction of (a) and (b), we fail to actually chomp trailing whitespace, meaning our endp _always_ points to a NUL, canceling out the problem. But that does leave (b) as a real bug: when ignoring whitespace only at the end-of-line, we don't correctly trim it, and fail to match up lines. We can fix the whole thing by moving consistently to one convention. Since convention (1) is idiomatic in our code base, we'll pick that one. The existing "-w" and "-b" tests continue to pass, and a new "--ignore-space-at-eol" shows off the breakage we're fixing. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-10-19 23:29:26 +03:00
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 6 <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 7 <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 8 <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 9 <RESET>
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<RED>-long line 6<RESET>
<RED>-long line 7<RESET>
<RED>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual &&
diff.c: decouple white space treatment from move detection algorithm In the original implementation of the move detection logic the choice for ignoring white space changes is the same for the move detection as it is for the regular diff. Some cases came up where different treatment would have been nice. Allow the user to specify that white space should be ignored differently during detection of moved lines than during generation of added and removed lines. This is done by providing analogs to the --ignore-space-at-eol, -b, and -w options by introducing the option --color-moved-ws=<modes> with the modes named "ignore-space-at-eol", "ignore-space-change" and "ignore-all-space", which is used only during the move detection phase. As we change the default, we'll adjust the tests. For now we do not infer any options to treat white spaces in the move detection from the generic white space options given to diff. This can be tuned later to reasonable default. As we plan on adding more white space related options in a later patch, that interferes with the current white space options, use a flag field and clamp it down to XDF_WHITESPACE_FLAGS, as that (a) allows to easily check at parse time if we give invalid combinations and (b) can reuse parts of this patch. By having the white space treatment in its own option, we'll also make it easier for a later patch to have an config option for spaces in the move detection. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-17 02:05:40 +03:00
git diff HEAD --no-renames --color-moved --color \
--color-moved-ws=ignore-space-at-eol >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
diff: fix whitespace-skipping with --color-moved The code for handling whitespace with --color-moved represents partial strings as a pair of pointers. There are two possible conventions for the end pointer: 1. It points to the byte right after the end of the string. 2. It points to the final byte of the string. But we seem to use both conventions in the code: a. we assign the initial pointers from the NUL-terminated string using (1) b. we eat trailing whitespace by checking the second pointer for isspace(), which needs (2) c. the next_byte() function checks for end-of-string with "if (cp > endp)", which is (2) d. in next_byte() we skip past internal whitespace with "while (cp < end)", which is (1) This creates fewer bugs than you might think, because there are some subtle interactions. Because of (a) and (c), we always return the NUL-terminator from next_byte(). But all of the callers of next_byte() happen to handle that gracefully. Because of the mismatch between (d) and (c), next_byte() could accidentally return a whitespace character right at endp. But because of the interaction of (a) and (b), we fail to actually chomp trailing whitespace, meaning our endp _always_ points to a NUL, canceling out the problem. But that does leave (b) as a real bug: when ignoring whitespace only at the end-of-line, we don't correctly trim it, and fail to match up lines. We can fix the whole thing by moving consistently to one convention. Since convention (1) is idiomatic in our code base, we'll pick that one. The existing "-w" and "-b" tests continue to pass, and a new "--ignore-space-at-eol" shows off the breakage we're fixing. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-10-19 23:29:26 +03:00
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/lines.txt b/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/lines.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/lines.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@<RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 6 <RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 7 <RESET>
<CYAN>+<RESET><CYAN>long line 8 <RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>long line 9 <RESET>
line 1<RESET>
line 2<RESET>
line 3<RESET>
line 4<RESET>
line 5<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 6<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 7<RESET>
<MAGENTA>-long line 8<RESET>
<RED>-long line 9<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'clean up whitespace-test colors' '
git config --unset color.diff.oldMoved &&
git config --unset color.diff.newMoved
'
test_expect_success '--color-moved block at end of diff output respects MIN_ALNUM_COUNT' '
git reset --hard &&
>bar &&
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
irrelevant_line
line1
EOF
git add foo bar &&
git commit -m x &&
cat <<-\EOF >bar &&
line1
EOF
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
irrelevant_line
EOF
git diff HEAD --color-moved=zebra --color --no-renames >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat >expected <<-\EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/bar b/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/bar<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -0,0 +1 @@<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>line1<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/foo b/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/foo<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,2 +1 @@<RESET>
irrelevant_line<RESET>
<RED>-line1<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success '--color-moved respects MIN_ALNUM_COUNT' '
git reset --hard &&
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
nineteen chars 456789
irrelevant_line
twenty chars 234567890
EOF
>bar &&
git add foo bar &&
git commit -m x &&
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
irrelevant_line
EOF
cat <<-\EOF >bar &&
twenty chars 234567890
nineteen chars 456789
EOF
git diff HEAD --color-moved=zebra --color --no-renames >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat >expected <<-\EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/bar b/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/bar<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET><BOLD;CYAN>twenty chars 234567890<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>nineteen chars 456789<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/foo b/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/foo<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,3 +1 @@<RESET>
<RED>-nineteen chars 456789<RESET>
irrelevant_line<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-twenty chars 234567890<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success '--color-moved treats adjacent blocks as separate for MIN_ALNUM_COUNT' '
git reset --hard &&
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
7charsA
irrelevant_line
7charsB
7charsC
EOF
>bar &&
git add foo bar &&
git commit -m x &&
cat <<-\EOF >foo &&
irrelevant_line
EOF
cat <<-\EOF >bar &&
7charsB
7charsC
7charsA
EOF
git diff HEAD --color-moved=zebra --color --no-renames >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat >expected <<-\EOF &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/bar b/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/bar<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/bar<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>7charsB<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>7charsC<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>7charsA<RESET>
<BOLD>diff --git a/foo b/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/foo<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/foo<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,4 +1 @@<RESET>
<RED>-7charsA<RESET>
irrelevant_line<RESET>
<RED>-7charsB<RESET>
<RED>-7charsC<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
test_expect_success 'move detection with submodules' '
test_create_repo bananas &&
echo ripe >bananas/recipe &&
git -C bananas add recipe &&
test_commit fruit &&
test_commit -C bananas recipe &&
git submodule add ./bananas &&
git add bananas &&
git commit -a -m "bananas are like a heavy library?" &&
echo foul >bananas/recipe &&
echo ripe >fruit.t &&
git diff --submodule=diff --color-moved --color >actual &&
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
# no move detection as the moved line is across repository boundaries.
test_decode_color <actual >decoded_actual &&
! grep BGREEN decoded_actual &&
! grep BRED decoded_actual &&
# nor did we mess with it another way
git diff --submodule=diff --color >expect.raw &&
test_decode_color <expect.raw >expect &&
diff.c: decouple white space treatment from move detection algorithm In the original implementation of the move detection logic the choice for ignoring white space changes is the same for the move detection as it is for the regular diff. Some cases came up where different treatment would have been nice. Allow the user to specify that white space should be ignored differently during detection of moved lines than during generation of added and removed lines. This is done by providing analogs to the --ignore-space-at-eol, -b, and -w options by introducing the option --color-moved-ws=<modes> with the modes named "ignore-space-at-eol", "ignore-space-change" and "ignore-all-space", which is used only during the move detection phase. As we change the default, we'll adjust the tests. For now we do not infer any options to treat white spaces in the move detection from the generic white space options given to diff. This can be tuned later to reasonable default. As we plan on adding more white space related options in a later patch, that interferes with the current white space options, use a flag field and clamp it down to XDF_WHITESPACE_FLAGS, as that (a) allows to easily check at parse time if we give invalid combinations and (b) can reuse parts of this patch. By having the white space treatment in its own option, we'll also make it easier for a later patch to have an config option for spaces in the move detection. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-17 02:05:40 +03:00
test_cmp expect decoded_actual &&
rm -rf bananas &&
git submodule deinit bananas
'
test_expect_success 'only move detection ignores white spaces' '
git reset --hard &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
a long line to exceed per-line minimum
another long line to exceed per-line minimum
original file
EOF
git add text.txt &&
git commit -m "add text" &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
Qa long line to exceed per-line minimum
Qanother long line to exceed per-line minimum
new file
EOF
# Make sure we get a different diff using -w
git diff --color --color-moved -w >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/text.txt b/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/text.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@<RESET>
Qa long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
Qanother long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
<RED>-original file<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>new file<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual &&
# And now ignoring white space only in the move detection
git diff --color --color-moved \
--color-moved-ws=ignore-all-space,ignore-space-change,ignore-space-at-eol >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/text.txt b/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/text.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-a long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-another long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
<RED>-original file<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>Q<BOLD;CYAN>a long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>Q<BOLD;CYAN>another long line to exceed per-line minimum<RESET>
diff.c: decouple white space treatment from move detection algorithm In the original implementation of the move detection logic the choice for ignoring white space changes is the same for the move detection as it is for the regular diff. Some cases came up where different treatment would have been nice. Allow the user to specify that white space should be ignored differently during detection of moved lines than during generation of added and removed lines. This is done by providing analogs to the --ignore-space-at-eol, -b, and -w options by introducing the option --color-moved-ws=<modes> with the modes named "ignore-space-at-eol", "ignore-space-change" and "ignore-all-space", which is used only during the move detection phase. As we change the default, we'll adjust the tests. For now we do not infer any options to treat white spaces in the move detection from the generic white space options given to diff. This can be tuned later to reasonable default. As we plan on adding more white space related options in a later patch, that interferes with the current white space options, use a flag field and clamp it down to XDF_WHITESPACE_FLAGS, as that (a) allows to easily check at parse time if we give invalid combinations and (b) can reuse parts of this patch. By having the white space treatment in its own option, we'll also make it easier for a later patch to have an config option for spaces in the move detection. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-17 02:05:40 +03:00
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>new file<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
diff.c: color moved lines differently When a patch consists mostly of moving blocks of code around, it can be quite tedious to ensure that the blocks are moved verbatim, and not undesirably modified in the move. To that end, color blocks that are moved within the same patch differently. For example (OM, del, add, and NM are different colors): [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OM] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OM] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OM] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NM] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NM] + multiple, [NM] + lines); [NM] +} However adjacent blocks may be problematic. For example, in this potentially malicious patch, the swapping of blocks can be spotted: [OM] -void sensitive_stuff(void) [OM] -{ [OMA] - if (!is_authorized_user()) [OMA] - die("unauthorized"); [OM] - sensitive_stuff(spanning, [OM] - multiple, [OM] - lines); [OMA] -} void another_function() { [del] - printf("foo"); [add] + printf("bar"); } [NM] +void sensitive_stuff(void) [NM] +{ [NMA] + sensitive_stuff(spanning, [NMA] + multiple, [NMA] + lines); [NM] + if (!is_authorized_user()) [NM] + die("unauthorized"); [NMA] +} If the moved code is larger, it is easier to hide some permutation in the code, which is why some alternative coloring is needed. This patch implements the first mode: * basic alternating 'Zebra' mode This conveys all information needed to the user. Defer customization to later patches. First I implemented an alternative design, which would try to fingerprint a line by its neighbors to detect if we are in a block or at the boundary. This idea iss error prone as it inspected each line and its neighboring lines to determine if the line was (a) moved and (b) if was deep inside a hunk by having matching neighboring lines. This is unreliable as the we can construct hunks which have equal neighbors that just exceed the number of lines inspected. (Think of 'AXYZBXYZCXYZD..' with each letter as a line, that is permutated to AXYZCXYZBXYZD..'). Instead this provides a dynamic programming greedy algorithm that finds the largest moved hunk and then has several modes on highlighting bounds. A note on the options '--submodule=diff' and '--color-words/--word-diff': In the conversion to use emit_line in the prior patches both submodules as well as word diff output carefully chose to call emit_line with sign=0. All output with sign=0 is ignored for move detection purposes in this patch, such that no weird looking output will be generated for these cases. This leads to another thought: We could pass on '--color-moved' to submodules such that they color up moved lines for themselves. If we'd do so only line moves within a repository boundary are marked up. It is useful to have moved lines colored, but there are annoying corner cases, such as a single line moved, that is very common. For example in a typical patch of C code, we have closing braces that end statement blocks or functions. While it is technically true that these lines are moved as they show up elsewhere, it is harmful for the review as the reviewers attention is drawn to such a minor side annoyance. For now let's have a simple solution of hardcoding the number of moved lines to be at least 3 before coloring them. Note, that the length is applied across all blocks to find the 'lonely' blocks that pollute new code, but do not interfere with a permutated block where each permutation has less lines than 3. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-06-30 23:53:07 +03:00
'
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
test_expect_success 'compare whitespace delta across moved blocks' '
git reset --hard &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
QIndented
QText across
Qsome lines
QBut! <- this stands out
QAdjusting with
QQdifferent starting
Qwhite spaces
QAnother outlier
QQQIndented
QQQText across
QQQfive lines
QQQthat has similar lines
QQQto previous blocks, but with different indent
QQQYetQAnotherQoutlierQ
QLine with internal w h i t e s p a c e change
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
EOF
git add text.txt &&
git commit -m "add text.txt" &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >text.txt &&
QQIndented
QQText across
QQsome lines
QQQBut! <- this stands out
Adjusting with
Qdifferent starting
white spaces
AnotherQoutlier
QQIndented
QQText across
QQfive lines
QQthat has similar lines
QQto previous blocks, but with different indent
QQYetQAnotherQoutlier
QLine with internal whitespace change
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
EOF
git diff --color --color-moved --color-moved-ws=allow-indentation-change >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
q_to_tab <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/text.txt b/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/text.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,15 +1,15 @@<RESET>
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QIndented<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QText across<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-Qsome lines<RESET>
<RED>-QBut! <- this stands out<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QAdjusting with<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQdifferent starting<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-Qwhite spaces<RESET>
<RED>-QAnother outlier<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQQIndented<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQQText across<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQQfive lines<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQQthat has similar lines<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-QQQto previous blocks, but with different indent<RESET>
<RED>-QQQYetQAnotherQoutlierQ<RESET>
<RED>-QLine with internal w h i t e s p a c e change<RESET>
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>Indented<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>Text across<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>some lines<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET>QQQ<GREEN>But! <- this stands out<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET><BOLD;CYAN>Adjusting with<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>Q<BOLD;CYAN>different starting<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET><BOLD;CYAN>white spaces<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET><GREEN>AnotherQoutlier<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>Indented<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>Text across<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>five lines<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>that has similar lines<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET>QQ<BOLD;CYAN>to previous blocks, but with different indent<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET>QQ<GREEN>YetQAnotherQoutlier<RESET>
<GREEN>+<RESET>Q<GREEN>Line with internal whitespace change<RESET>
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'bogus settings in move detection erroring out' '
test_must_fail git diff --color-moved=bogus 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "must be one of" err &&
test_i18ngrep bogus err &&
test_must_fail git -c diff.colormoved=bogus diff 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "must be one of" err &&
test_i18ngrep "from command-line config" err &&
test_must_fail git diff --color-moved-ws=bogus 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "possible values" err &&
test_i18ngrep bogus err &&
test_must_fail git -c diff.colormovedws=bogus diff 2>err &&
test_i18ngrep "possible values" err &&
test_i18ngrep "from command-line config" err
'
diff.c: add white space mode to move detection that allows indent changes The option of --color-moved has proven to be useful as observed on the mailing list. However when refactoring sometimes the indentation changes, for example when partitioning a functions into smaller helper functions the code usually mostly moved around except for a decrease in indentation. To just review the moved code ignoring the change in indentation, a mode to ignore spaces in the move detection as implemented in a previous patch would be enough. However the whole move coloring as motivated in commit 2e2d5ac (diff.c: color moved lines differently, 2017-06-30), brought up the notion of the reviewer being able to trust the move of a "block". As there are languages such as python, which depend on proper relative indentation for the control flow of the program, ignoring any white space change in a block would not uphold the promises of 2e2d5ac that allows reviewers to pay less attention to the inside of a block, as inside the reviewer wants to assume the same program flow. This new mode of white space ignorance will take this into account and will only allow the same white space changes per line in each block. This patch even allows only for the same change at the beginning of the lines. As this is a white space mode, it is made exclusive to other white space modes in the move detection. This patch brings some challenges, related to the detection of blocks. We need a wide net to catch the possible moved lines, but then need to narrow down to check if the blocks are still intact. Consider this example (ignoring block sizes): - A - B - C + A + B + C At the beginning of a block when checking if there is a counterpart for A, we have to ignore all space changes. However at the following lines we have to check if the indent change stayed the same. Checking if the indentation change did stay the same, is done by computing the indentation change by the difference in line length, and then assume the change is only in the beginning of the longer line, the common tail is the same. That is why the test contains lines like: - <TAB> A ... + A <TAB> ... As the first line starting a block is caught using a compare function that ignores white spaces unlike the rest of the block, where the white space delta is taken into account for the comparison, we also have to think about the following situation: - A - B - A - B + A + B + A + B When checking if the first A (both in the + and - lines) is a start of a block, we have to check all 'A' and record all the white space deltas such that we can find the example above to be just one block that is indented. Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-07-18 22:31:55 +03:00
test_expect_success 'compare whitespace delta incompatible with other space options' '
test_must_fail git diff \
--color-moved-ws=allow-indentation-change,ignore-all-space \
2>err &&
test_i18ngrep allow-indentation-change err
'
EMPTY=''
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
test_expect_success 'compare mixed whitespace delta across moved blocks' '
git reset --hard &&
tr Q_ "\t " <<-EOF >text.txt &&
${EMPTY}
____too short without
${EMPTY}
___being grouped across blank line
${EMPTY}
context
lines
to
anchor
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
____Indented text to
_Q____be further indented by four spaces across
____Qseveral lines
QQ____These two lines have had their
____indentation reduced by four spaces
Qdifferent indentation change
____too short
EOF
git add text.txt &&
git commit -m "add text.txt" &&
tr Q_ "\t " <<-EOF >text.txt &&
context
lines
to
anchor
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
QIndented text to
QQbe further indented by four spaces across
Q____several lines
${EMPTY}
QQtoo short without
${EMPTY}
Q_______being grouped across blank line
${EMPTY}
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
Q_QThese two lines have had their
indentation reduced by four spaces
QQdifferent indentation change
__Qtoo short
EOF
git -c color.diff.whitespace="normal red" \
-c core.whitespace=space-before-tab \
diff --color --color-moved --ws-error-highlight=all \
--color-moved-ws=allow-indentation-change >actual.raw &&
grep -v "index" actual.raw | test_decode_color >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expected &&
<BOLD>diff --git a/text.txt b/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>--- a/text.txt<RESET>
<BOLD>+++ b/text.txt<RESET>
<CYAN>@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET><BOLD;MAGENTA> too short without<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET><BOLD;MAGENTA> being grouped across blank line<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET>
<RESET>context<RESET>
<RESET>lines<RESET>
<RESET>to<RESET>
<RESET>anchor<RESET>
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET><BOLD;MAGENTA> Indented text to<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET><BRED> <RESET> <BOLD;MAGENTA> be further indented by four spaces across<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET><BRED> <RESET> <BOLD;MAGENTA>several lines<RESET>
<BOLD;BLUE>-<RESET> <BOLD;BLUE> These two lines have had their<RESET>
<BOLD;BLUE>-<RESET><BOLD;BLUE> indentation reduced by four spaces<RESET>
<BOLD;MAGENTA>-<RESET> <BOLD;MAGENTA>different indentation change<RESET>
<RED>-<RESET><RED> too short<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET> <BOLD;CYAN>Indented text to<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET> <BOLD;CYAN>be further indented by four spaces across<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET> <BOLD;CYAN> several lines<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET> <BOLD;YELLOW>too short without<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET> <BOLD;YELLOW> being grouped across blank line<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET> <BRED> <RESET> <BOLD;CYAN>These two lines have had their<RESET>
<BOLD;CYAN>+<RESET><BOLD;CYAN>indentation reduced by four spaces<RESET>
<BOLD;YELLOW>+<RESET> <BOLD;YELLOW>different indentation change<RESET>
2018-11-23 14:16:57 +03:00
<GREEN>+<RESET><BRED> <RESET> <GREEN>too short<RESET>
EOF
test_cmp expected actual
'
test_expect_success 'combine --ignore-blank-lines with --function-context' '
test_write_lines 1 "" 2 3 4 5 >a &&
test_write_lines 1 2 3 4 >b &&
test_must_fail git diff --no-index \
--ignore-blank-lines --function-context a b >actual.raw &&
sed -n "/@@/,\$p" <actual.raw >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expect &&
@@ -1,6 +1,4 @@
1
-
2
3
4
-5
EOF
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_expect_success 'combine --ignore-blank-lines with --function-context 2' '
test_write_lines a b c "" function 1 2 3 4 5 "" 6 7 8 9 >a &&
test_write_lines "" a b c "" function 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >b &&
test_must_fail git diff --no-index \
--ignore-blank-lines --function-context a b >actual.raw &&
sed -n "/@@/,\$p" <actual.raw >actual &&
cat <<-\EOF >expect &&
@@ -5,11 +6,9 @@ c
function
1
2
3
4
5
-
6
7
8
-9
EOF
test_cmp expect actual
'
test_done