On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 2:35 AM, Felipe Contreras
<felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> So we can type '@' instead of 'HEAD@', or rather 'HEAD'. So now we can
> use 'git show @~1', and all that goody goodness.
I like this. I haven't spent a lot of time on thinking about
ambiguation. But I think we're safe there. '@' is not overloaded much
like ':', '^' or '~'.
> This patch allows 'HEAD@' to be the same as 'HEAD@{0}', and similarly with
> 'master@'.
I'm a bit reluctant to this. It looks like incomplete syntax to me as
'@' has always been followed by '{'. Can we have the lone '@' candy
but reject master@ and HEAD@? There's no actual gain in writing
master@ vs master@{0}.
> +'@'::
> + '@' alone is a shortcut for 'HEAD'
> +
And this does not explain about HEAD@ or master@. But because I prefer
the candy part only. This documentation part looks good :)
--
Duy
--
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