[m-dev.] for review: cleanup of liveness info around calls

[Tyson Dowd]

On 11-Nov-1998, Zoltan Somogyi <zs at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> 
> > Perhaps it's just a matter of experience, but I can read unified diffs
> > relatively easily, while context diffs require my full attention just
> > to see what has changed.
> 
> Virtually all the time I would agree with you, and I think it would
> be a good idea to replace context diffs with unified diffs for the tests.

I agree with this, but I'll reply in Fergus's reply.

> 
> > After trying to review the context diff, I am more convinced than
> > ever that context diffs offer no advantages over unified diffs,
> > and that unified diffs are easier to review.  (although in side-by-side
> > context would be great).
> 
> In this particular case, the change to code_info was a rewrite; almost
> no line of code in the affected submodule was unchanged. The reason I used
> a context diff here is because with a context diff, once you untangle where
> the regions start and end (and this time all the significant changes were
> in one big region in each file), you *can* effectively put them side by side
> by looking at two copies of the diff in two different windows, with
> one window looking at the region from one file while the other window
> looks at the corrresponding region from the other file. Perhaps you
> didn't know that trick.

Good point.  I didn't think of that.

I withdraw my complaint -- the context diffs are fine.

-- 

Because I dislike being quoted I lie almost constantly when talking 
about my work.
		-- Terry Gilliam

Tyson Dowd   <tyson at tyse.net>   http://tyse.net/tyson