Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:49 AM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> So HEAD@{0}~0^0 is too much to type, but we can remove '^0', and we can
>> remove '~0', and we can remove 'HEAD', which leaves us with @{0}, but we
>> can't remove '{0}'?
>>
>> This patch allows '@' to be the same as 'HEAD'.
>>
>> So now we can use 'git show @~1', and all that goody goodness.
>>
>> Until now '@' was a valid name, but it conflicts with this idea, so lets
>> make it invalid. Very few people if any probably used this name, if they
>> did, they can rename it by using the full-path (e.g. refs/heads/@).
>
> People can write master short for refs/heads/master, but can't with
> refs/heads/@.
Is it a new problem?
You can not say HEAD to refer to refs/heads/HEAD, either. To avoid
confusion, we teach "git branch HEAD $commit" to error out (but it
seems that "git checkout -b HEAD $commit" does not).
We probably would want to do the same for '@' when we refactor to
have a central place that knows what the "make sense as refnames at
the syntactic level, but are forbidden for operational purposes"
branch names are. And use it to update "git checkout -b".
--
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