Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, Aghiles wrote: > > > > Oh, I should have read the documentation. I was certain that ".." stands > > for a range but it is a ... complement. > > Well, technically ".." means two different things > > - for "set operations" (ie "git log" and friends) it's the "relative > complement" of two sets (or "'reachable from A' \ 'reachable from B'"). > > - for "edge operations" (ie "git diff" and friends) it's just two > end-points (aka "range"). A diff doesn't work on sets, it only works on > the two endpoints. [...] > Most SCM's really talk about "ranges". Once you think in those terms, > complex history doesn't work. Git very fundamentally is much about set > theory, and "ranges" is a bad word to use. For example from I have got from asking on #mercurial IRC channel on FreeNode (a bit of self promotion: I have done this research to write an answer to "Git and Mercurial - Compare and Contrast" question on StackOverflow[1]), Mercurial implements its ".." equivalent in the term of _numeric range_, even for "hg log" (sic!). It turns revision identifiers used in range (-r <rev1>:<rev2>) to LOCAL number of revision, and generates range based on numeric range, IIRC inclusive on both sides (in Git range is exclusive from bottom, inclusive from top). Which is plain useless for anything but linear subsets of history (compare e.g. "master..next", which in Git shows everything in "next" that is not in "master"; "master" and "next" are not direct descendants of one oanother, at least not usually). [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1598759/git-and-mercurial-compare-and-contrast/1599930#1599930 P.S. I wonder if Mercurial development list is subscribe-only... -- Jakub Narebski Poland ShadeHawk on #git -- 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