Re: Questions about git-rev-parse

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx> writes:

> So I'm wondering if I'm missing something about historical context,
> since from looking at git-rev-parse, it looks like not a lot of thought
> went into its design, and it has a bunch of stuff that grew via
> accretion; or maybe I'm not understanding why it was designed the way it
> was?

You are lacking historical context that our porcelain-ish were
all Bourne shell scripts.  If you check out an old version (say
v0.99), it would be apparent why translating symbolic names to
object names and canonicalizing a..b to b ^a were useful to help
them.

These days, "log" family got sufficiently smart that there are
not many reasons to write shell pipeline that has rev-list on
the upstream with diff-tree --stdin on the downstream anymore,
and rev-parse outlived its original purpose of sifting between
rev-list args/flags and others.

-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]