On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 7:28 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 18/05/21 18.17, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > +Commands that are specifically designed to take two distinct ranges > > +(e.g. "git range-diff R1 R2" to compare two ranges) do exist, but > > +they are exceptions. Unless otherwise noted, all "git" commands > > +that operate on a set of commits work on a single revision range. > > +In other words, writing two "two-dot range notation" next to each > > +other, e.g. > > + > > + $ git log A..B C..D > > + > > +does *not* specify two revision ranges for most commands. Instead > > +it will name a single connected set of commits, i.e. those that are > > +reachable from either B or D but are reachable from neither A or C. > > +In a linear history like this: > > + > > + ---A---B---o---o---C---D > > + Why did you snip off the immediate next part of Junio's text which said: +because A and B are reachable from C, the revision range specified +by these two dotted ranges is a single commit D. Is this sentence hard to parse or confusing in some way? I thought this sentence would have made it pretty clear that the answer to this question: > > So "git log A..B C..D" is same as "A..D", right? was 'no', so I'm curious if that particular final sentence's wording could be improved.
