Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> The empty treeish in ":path" means "index". Document this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt | 5 +++--
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt b/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> index 8db600f..f964de4 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-rev-parse.txt
> @@ -290,8 +290,9 @@ the `$GIT_DIR/refs` directory or from the `$GIT_DIR/packed-refs` file.
> followed by something else than '!' is reserved for now.
>
> * A suffix ':' followed by a path; this names the blob or tree
> - at the given path in the tree-ish object named by the part
> - before the colon.
> + at the given path in the tree-ish object named by the ref
> + before the colon. An empty ref before ':' denotes the content
> + recorded in the index at the given path.
I am wondering if it is less confusing to present these two cases as two
independent entries...
A colon ':' followed by a path names the blob at the given path in the
index.
A tree-ish, followed by a colon ':', followed by a path names the blob
or tree at the given path in the tree-ish.
It is not like we treat the index as a pseudo tree, but your wording
implies we do in this syntax. We of course cannot treat the index as a
pseudo tree in all operations, and people can get confused and ask "When
can I say empty to mean index?"...
Thoughts?
--
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