Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> + When writing contents, only modify files in the worktree. Do not >> + modify the index. This option is essentially a no-op when used >> + without a `<tree-ish>`. > > Why a no-op rather than actually diagnosing that --worktree makes no > sense in that case and erroring out? Should it be a no-op? If checking paths out of the index, with or without the new --worktree option, the files in the working tree will be affected and the contents in the index won't change.
