Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> In other words: the sequence "@" is short for "HEAD".
>
> That is saying a very different thing. master@{4.days} is not short
> for masterHEAD{4.days}.
I meant after ^, ~, @{} have been peeled off. Just before resolving
what's left.
> As design and semantics look still fuzzy (the primary one I am not
> sure about is if @ is a ref or just a revision), even though the
> desire to have _something_ seem to be popular, I am not particulary
> interested in looking at an alternative patch. I want to see the
> right semantics first.
I wanted to explain it through an implementation, but okay. In your
proposal, @ is a special ref: it behaves like a ref in a rev spec, but
cannot be update-ref'ed or symbolic-ref'ed. This is probably the best
we can do, unless we want to emulate a full ref (I'm not sure how
useful the .git/@ override will even be).
--
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