Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Of course I agree that "@ == HEAD" can't be used to go *backwards* > through that logic at all. But if you're moving forwards through it, > then "@" on its own can make sense as HEAD, but only as an implication > of "the most recent version of the current branch can't be anything > else" I'd rather put the lame excuses behind and accept that we ended up with an ugly and illogical synonym that ;-) And making it consistently available in places where HEAD is accepted is a good thing. Depending on the keyboard, it may be easy to type, too.
