Hi, On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 11:04:42PM -0500, Avery Pennarun wrote: > > > Speaking just for myself, I would find this all a lot less confusing > > if "staged" were a refspec of some sort, not an option at all. > > > > git diff HEAD..STAGED > > git diff STAGED..WORKTREE > > git grep pattern STAGED HEAD sillybranch WORKTREE ^ignorebranch -- > > path/to/files > > I agree that such a thing is reasonably intuitive. I have thought about > "magic" refspecs before; my local git has an "EMPTY" refspec which > points to the empty tree for diffing. However, that was trivial to > implement (since it turns into a sha1), and yours is very hard (since > you will have to pass these "pretend" objects around). > > So I think it is a neat idea, but I am not volunteering to work on it. > :) Just in case anybody thought about creating tree objects on the fly and use their SHA-1s: that won't fly, as you can have unmerged entries in the index. So STAGED.. is a _fundamentally_ different thing from HEAD^.. Maybe we could play tricks with a special staged_commit (pretending to be a commit with SHA-1 000000... so that git log STAGED.. would do the same as plain git log, the rationale being that STAGED is no commit, so ^STAGED should be a nop). "git diff" would then have some special handling for the case that there are exactly two revs, exactly one of them negative, and exactly one of them being the staged_commit, passing off to the respective diff backends. Ciao, Dscho -- 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
