Would love to get some feedback
Would love to get some feedback
git difftool --tool=vimdiffvim folds are fully programmable. For me a bigger issue was git calling vimdiff for each file, which I fixed with my own difftool: https://gist.github.com/PhilipRoman/60066716b5fa09fcabfa6c95...
(I found that my mac machine doesn't support the '-printf' option, and also I was attempting to run 'git bvd main' on a branch but it seems it does a recursive directory diff, so I'll use 'git diff --name-only' as the input to the awk command).
Edit: worked nicely! I haven't used tabs much in vim so is a slightly new workflow but otherwise very handy
I admit I haven't looked super hard yet, I settled on configuring git to use delta [0] for now and I'm happy with it, but I'm curious if anyone has a workflow for reviewing/iterating on diffs in the terminal that they'd be willing to share. Also open to being told that I'm lightyears behind and that there's a better mental model for this.
This in conjunction with gh-dash [1] to launch a review can get you a pretty nice TUI review workflow.
[0] https://github.com/pwntester/octo.nvim
[1] https://github.com/dlvhdr/gh-dash
*Edit: I see you meant providing feedback to an agent, not a PR. Well that's what I get for reading too fast.
Once you submit it outputs to stdout and the agent reads your comments and actions them.
The two are kind of similar if I remember correctly, and both offer a lot of config options to change the style and more. I mostly use it for diffs involving long lines since it highlights changes within a line, which makes it easier to spot such edits.
I have an alias set in `~/.gitconfig` to pipe the output of `git diff` (with options) to `diff-so-fancy` with `git diffs`:
diffs = "!f() { git diff $@ | diff-so-fancy; }; f"
What nobody's mentioned yet is difftastic. Takes a completely different approach - parses syntax trees instead of lines, so indentation changes and bracket shuffles don't show up as noise. Worth a look if you're comparing options.
Main question I'd have: how does it hold up on large files? 5k+ line diffs are where most of these tools either choke or produce unreadable output. That'd be the test I'd run first.
emacs --eval='(ediff-files "file1" "file2")'
- even faster, especially if you have couple thousand files and just want to press "u" for some time and see them very quickly all get staged
- has this split-view diff opened for a file
Otherwise tig is one of my favorite tools to quickly commit stuff without too many key presses but with review abilities, i have its "tig status" aliased to "t"
What is most useful though is a 3-panel setup, like JetBrains -- still the best git client I have worked with.
...I really just like the way the Jetbrains IDEs do it, and I wish there were a TUI version that I could launch automatically from the git cli.
It probably explains why there is so many data leaks recently but it is like we did a 20 years jump back in time in terms of security in just a few years.
It does not install binaries, it builds the binary by checking out the project basically. You can also do the process manually and use the tool.
I bet 99.9999% of users do not review the code nor the install script.
And a link to an asciicinema would help a lot too.
---
Also, I'm not sure how useful the side-by-side view is.
The second example (https://github.com/flamestro/deff/blob/main/docs/example_02....) is confusing.
The left side has lines 1365-1371 having the same code as lines 1374-1380 on the right side, yet they're not aligned with each other.
Most diff views would put padding between lines 1364-1365 on the left side so lines 1365-1371 are aligned with 1374-1380 on the right side.
Great work on deff, would love to brainstorm here :)
meain•6h ago
lf-non•6h ago
Amorymeltzer•5h ago
behnamoh•5h ago
flamestro•4h ago