lots; the tongue-in-cheek name is "evil merge" but it's honestly pretty common precisely because, as you say, the mere textual merge could be a broken result.

lots; the tongue-in-cheek name is "evil merge" but it's honestly pretty common precisely because, as you say, the mere textual merge could be a broken result. "conflict" is a bad name because it sounds like some kind of error; it's just a place where a simple algorithm can't make a judgment call so a human has to. and it's not the only place. the only reason an "evil merge" is "evil" is because the tooling breaks down a little around it (however! if you look at diffs for commits, nearly all tooling will show you the useful information here, e.g. in gitk it's color coded bold black)