Refine diff input handling and strengthen test coverage#45
Conversation
GrantBirki
commented
Mar 4, 2026
GrantBirki
commented
- invoke git diff with argv parsing and workspace-scoped file inputs
- expand unit coverage for option parsing, output modes, and failure cases
- tighten acceptance checks and keep the test script resilient when badge generation is unavailable
- invoke git diff with argv parsing and workspace-scoped file inputs - expand unit coverage for option parsing, output modes, and failure cases - tighten acceptance checks and keep the test script resilient when badge generation is unavailable
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6a1a1c794c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| } else if (char === '\\') { | ||
| escaped = true | ||
| } else { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
tokenizeInputArgs strips every \ seen inside double quotes. Inputs like --word-diff-regex="\\w+" become --word-diff-regex=w+, so git diff receives a different option than requested and can produce incorrect output. This is a regression from shell-like quoting where \ is not removed before ordinary characters inside "...".
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
