Re: [Tools-discuss] rfcdiff lies

[Carsten Bormann <cabo at tzi.org>]

On Sep 21, 2009, at 15:32, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:

> I've made an experimental update of rfcdiff which doesn't consider  
> white-
> space significant

Thanks!

As you can see from section 1.1, this adds a bit of noise, but also  
makes the result more comprehensible (pure whitespace changes were not  
echoed in the right column, so when an actual change intervenes, the  
indentation becomes strange).

I think it is correct to err on the side of not losing changes, so I  
applaud this modification.
That went fast, by the way!

Gruesse, Carsten