Kenny Lee Sin Cheong <kenny.lee28@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Allows the use of the "-" shorthand notation, including
> use with revision ranges. If we plan to allow "-" as a stand in every
> where a revision is allowed, then "-" would also need to be usable in
> plumbing commands, for writing tests, for example.
>
> Checks if the argument can be interpreted as a revision range first
> before checking for flags. This saves us from having to check that
> something that begins with "-" does not get checked as a possible flag.
Doesn't that mean -<something> that is a valid flag can no longer be
recognised as a flag if the same string can be an extended SHA-1
whose formulation starts from "the previous branch"? It sounds like
a regression to me.
Hmmm.
After all, "we often call for the previous branch, so let's give a
short-and-sweet '-' as an even shorter short-hand than '@{-1}'" and
"allow '-' anywhere" are two quite different things. We may do "git
checkout -" very often to go back to what we were working on, but I
do not think "git log -.." or "git log ..-" are something we want to
do very often.
I think what I am saying is that it may be perfectly fine if we said
"'-' can be used for '@{-1}' only by itself; no ranges, no
parent-traversals, no other uses", if it makes it less likely for
mistakes and confusions to happen.
--
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