Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> On the other hand, I am OK if "checkout -b", "switch -c" and >> "--orphan" offered either: >> >> (1) nothing, as your patch does, or >> >> (2) all branches, except for the currently checked out one. > > Why reject the currently checked out one? If the premise is: "use a > current branch to build a new branch name", I don't see a reason to > restrict including the current branch here as well. Yeah, "(3) all branches, without any exception" makes sense too. >> It would be preferrable if they did the same thing. >> >> Thanks. > The problem I see, is that regardless, I would like to see the following: > > git switch -c new-branch-name <SPACE><TAB> > > complete all references for the starting point. Makes sense. The starting point could be any branch or even a tag. > With this series, that's handled by just checking for "-c/-C" on the > command line and enabling all references. There's no positional checks > done, so every word can complete to a reference. > > I don't know offhand how to add completion which depends on the > position of the word we're completing, so I'd have to investigate how > to make that happen. I see. Even though I say "(3) all branches" is a reasonable behaviour, too, if the starting point has to be more (i.e. including tags), that would not help the issue you have here. It may not be too bad if we offered all refs (including tags, which may not be a good idea) in that case. I dunno. Thanks.
