5 ms·

One thing that especially git fails at, is content that’s been moved around. Moving content is a simple and powerful editorial tool, but it starts to make any s

• dash2 3y ago
  That's a really interesting point, I'll think about it. There's a tension between "making it clear what the change is" and "making it clear what the old and new versions are". One approach would be something like --[MOVED X: blah blah blah]-- ... +[FROM X: blah blah blah]++. A more radical one is --[>>>]-- ... ++[<<< blah blah blah]++ where you actually delete the content from its old position, leaving only a marker.
  • SOLAR_FIELDS 3y ago
    Isn’t the latter one how git works? I think one difficulty with the former from git’s POV is that it’s difficult to divine the difference between moves and add/delete without the end user explicitly specifying that they’ve “moved” a file. One easy to grok example is moving a file to one location and creating a copy of that file in another location in that same diff. Perhaps in this approach that same limitation does not exist