4 ms·

I've always been puzzled by 4-way merge not being more common. Support is quite rare. KDiff3 is another tool that supports it.

hprotagonist 4y ago
KDiff3 is so consistently good and itself. I’ve been using it for ever; i don't expect to stop.
- gpvos 4y ago
  Beyond Compare (not free) seems to have all kdiff3's features, plus some nice features for comparing tables (CSV or Excel) (although you need to tweak the defaults to make them actually useful). Also, it has syntax highlighting in its diff view, and I find its directory diff nicer than kdiff3's. I haven't used it for merging yet though; although it has three-way merge, I just am more familiar with kdiff3 and trust it since I've been using it for more than 20 years now.
eastbound 4y ago
I’ve always been puzzled by 3-way merge being remotely common. It’s almost “Here’s your latest file on two branches, good luck!” — There is obviously one leg missing but dare pointing it to a developer and he will tell you “But we have everything there” and when you draw a graph to explain the conceptual problem, “Ok but in general the two ancestors are common.” A fortnight later, they wreck a merge and they spend their afternoon re-merging conflicts they’ve already had. Such people almost always use the git tools provided in IntelliJ.
- pjerem 4y ago
  > Such people almost always use the git tools provided in IntelliJ. OTOH, IntelliJ’s "Magic wand" is totally worth the hassle.
- WalterGR 4y ago
  > but dare pointing it to a developer and he will tell you Sadomasochism runs deep. If you’re not suffering for your craft, you’re not a Real Programmer.
- onetom 4y ago
  In my experience, ppl who are using command-line git or magit in Emacs are tying a knot on their genitals with trying to merge branches way more often than ppl using IntelliJ. I wouldn't know how to explain what does the magic wand do, but it seems a huge waste of time NOT having it in other merge solutions. I can't remember a case where it the magic wand was causing a semantic error and I'm using it for 7-8 years by now. Mostly in Clojure code though.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

hprotagonist 4y ago

KDiff3 is so consistently good and itself. I’ve been using it for ever; i don't expect to stop.

gpvos 4y ago
Beyond Compare (not free) seems to have all kdiff3's features, plus some nice features for comparing tables (CSV or Excel) (although you need to tweak the defaults to make them actually useful). Also, it has syntax highlighting in its diff view, and I find its directory diff nicer than kdiff3's. I haven't used it for merging yet though; although it has three-way merge, I just am more familiar with kdiff3 and trust it since I've been using it for more than 20 years now.

eastbound 4y ago

I’ve always been puzzled by 3-way merge being remotely common. It’s almost “Here’s your latest file on two branches, good luck!” — There is obviously one leg missing but dare pointing it to a developer and he will tell you “But we have everything there” and when you draw a graph to explain the conceptual problem, “Ok but in general the two ancestors are common.” A fortnight later, they wreck a merge and they spend their afternoon re-merging conflicts they’ve already had. Such people almost always use the git tools provided in IntelliJ.

pjerem 4y ago
> Such people almost always use the git tools provided in IntelliJ. OTOH, IntelliJ’s "Magic wand" is totally worth the hassle.
WalterGR 4y ago
> but dare pointing it to a developer and he will tell you Sadomasochism runs deep. If you’re not suffering for your craft, you’re not a Real Programmer.
onetom 4y ago
In my experience, ppl who are using command-line git or magit in Emacs are tying a knot on their genitals with trying to merge branches way more often than ppl using IntelliJ. I wouldn't know how to explain what does the magic wand do, but it seems a huge waste of time NOT having it in other merge solutions. I can't remember a case where it the magic wand was causing a semantic error and I'm using it for 7-8 years by now. Mostly in Clojure code though.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]