So, Plastic requires an = to be adjacent to the filename, while P4V only supplies filenames next to whitespace. Meanwhile, Plastic's merge tool accepts arguments -source=, -dest=, etc., and does not recognize -source etc. The problem is, it only recognizes those “variables” when they’re surrounded by white-space. P4V's configuration allows you to specify command-line arguments for the merge tool, in which you can put %1, %2, %b, and %r, which are substituted with the actual source, target, base, and result file-paths. Thankfully, it's easy once you have some instructions. Unfortunately, configuring P4V to use Plastic Merge isn't intuitive. P4Merge was writing different content to the file than it was previewing in its GUI. half of line 12 somehow ended up repeated in line 204). After resolving some conflicts, I was surprised to see my code fail to compile, and found it to be grossly mangled in ways that couldn't have resulted from user error alone (e.g. Recently, however, I felt compelled to switch back to Plastic Merge, after running into an intermittent P4Merge glitch one too many times. Again, instead of customizing P4V right away, I gave its default diff configuration a chance. In recent years, I've worked for a few clients that use Perforce (now called Helix ). Above all else, though, when it came to C# files, Plastic was capable of recognizing, highlighting, and merging moved code. I've run a few merges through both tools for comparison, and found that Plastic was able to auto-resolve differences (correctly) that P4Merge saw as conflicts. Where P4Merge chose to group big swaths of changes despite the presence of common lines, Plastic was able to recognize the smaller groups of differences. UE4's 15MB+ ), Plastic would simply refuse to open, while P4Merge managed well enough.īut Plastic's merge tool more than made up for these downsides by recognizing changes more intelligently than P4Merge. In the rare case that I needed to merge a file that is several thousand lines long (e.g. Resolving conflicts require de-selecting two of three buttons at the top of the screen, while P4Merge requires selecting a single button in close proximity to the relevant output lines. There were a few downsides compared to P4Merge. The first time I needed to merge a file in this new system, I was delighted to see that Plastic Merge, too, sported four panels. Plastic comes with its own merge tool, and I decided to give that tool a chance, instead of replacing it with my favorite P4V right away. Then, I had the delight of using Plastic SCM for ElemenTerra, and dozens of other projects thereafter. Unlike most other merge tools which had only three panels (showing source, target, and result), P4V showed base in addition, providing greater clarity. For a long time, P4Merge remained my top choice. In the years since, I've looked into other merge tools at various times for various reasons, not least because I'm always eager to find better alternatives to whatever software I'm using. I used it to resolve merge conflicts in a Unity project that was tracked through Git. Back in 2013, when I was studying game development at USC, a classmate showed me how to install P4Merge, the free diff & merge program meant to supplement Perforce.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |