Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sergey Organov wrote: >> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Sergey Organov wrote: >> >> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> >> >> > Sergey Organov wrote: >> >> >> >> [...] >> >> >> >> >> Creating (a branch) is fundamentally different operation than switching >> >> >> to (a branch), and that's why the former doesn't fit into "git switch". >> >> > >> >> > Not in my mind. Instead of switching to an existing branch, I'm switching >> >> > to a new branch, which is easily understood by >> >> > `git switch --new branch`. >> >> >> >> To me: >> >> >> >> "create a new branch" is basic operation. >> >> >> >> "switch to another branch" is basic operation. >> >> >> >> "create a new branch and then switch to it" is compound operation. >> > >> > Compound operations soon become basic operations in the mind of an >> > expert. >> > >> > Lifting your feet, and then landing your feet might be basic operations >> > when you are 1 yo, but soon enough they become "walking". >> >> [caveat: please don't take the rest of this post too seriously] >> >> Yeah, using another name for a compound is yet another option indeed. >> "git cretching"? >> >> > Similarly checking out a commit and then cherry-picking a sequence of >> > commits while resolving conflicts becomes "rebasing". >> >> This is very questionable example. Please don't let me even start on >> this. > > You don't need to validate the concept, but chunking is an established > concept in cognitive pshychology [1]. It's how humans learn (and > possibly machines too). The urdge to dive into the muddy waters of psychology to support your example, where pure logic should probably have sufficed, makes the example only even more suspect. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
