Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Matthieu Moy wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: >> >> > But it is sloppy, in that it blindly accepts options that might be >> > valid for several subcommands, not just "save". >> >> I wouldn't call that sloppy. 'save' is the default command, if you don't >> provide any command, then 'save' will be used. > > 'save' might be the default command, but we don't trigger it with _any_ > crap, for a very good reason. Read the commit log for git-stash.sh to > know why. The good reason was people doing a typo when typing a command, like 'git stash aply' or so. And yes, I did find this annoying. The question of someone omitting the subcommand is very different to me. On can hardly type 'git stash -q' and claim he explicitely wanted to run 'pop'. Your proposal will almost certainly trigger complains from users: git stash -k => works git stash -k -q => doesn't work git stash -k "name of stash" => doesn't work git stash save -k "name of stash" => works git stash -p => works with another patch merged in next git stash -q => doesn't work git stash --patch --no-keep-index => works git stash --no-keep-index --patch => doesn't work You'll have a hard time explaining that to bare mortals. Look at what's the code's becomming: + 0,,|1,-k,|1,--keep-index,|1,-p,|1,--patch,|2,-p,--no-keep-index|2,--patch,--no-keep-index) when the code starts having to enumerate so many possibilities instead of having a simple logic, something's going wrong. -- Matthieu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html