Re: [PATCH] git-rev-parse.txt: clarify meaning of rev~ and rev~0.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, 14 Mar 2008, Sergei Organov wrote:
>>
>> +                      ...  'rev{tilde}' is equivalent to 'rev{tilde}0'
>> +  which in turn is equivalent to 'rev'.
>
> I'd actually prefer to just fix that. 
>
> I think it would make more sense to have the same guarantees that rev^ 
> has, namely to always return a commit. I would also suggest that not 
> giving a number would have the same effect of defaulting to 1, not 0.
>
> Right now it's a bit illogical, but at least it's an _undocumented_ 
> illogical behaviour. If we document it, we should fix it and document the 
> logical behaviour instead, no?

Yeah, I like it.  Not that I looked at your patch yet (which needs to wait
til evening), but I agree with the intent.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux