From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Cc: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>,
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-diff.txt: prefer not using <commit>..<commit>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2019 15:12:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lg1da8uj.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8C3P93896fP8BStmYd1WMNukYV6u8gB0zgC3rKLqxgzyQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Mar 17 2019, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 8:41 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 17 2019, Denton Liu wrote:
>>
>> > The documentation used to consider
>> >
>> > git diff <commit> <commit>
>> >
>> > and
>> >
>> > git diff <commit>..<commit>
>> >
>> > to be equal counterparts. However, rev-list-ish commands also use the
>> > <commit>..<commit> notation, but in a logically conflicting manner which
>> > was confusing for some users (including me!).
>> >
>> > Deprecating the notation entirely is not really an option because it
>> > would be an arduous process without much end-value. In addition, there
>> > are some valid use-cases that we don't want to break.
>> >
>> > Document the preference of the first form so that future confusion can
>> > be minimised.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Thanks all on your feedback on the discussion thread[1]! I opted for
>> > just the documentation-only route so we don't break any valid use-cases.
>> >
>> > [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20190311093751.GA31092@archbookpro.localdomain/
>> >
>> > Documentation/git-diff.txt | 6 +++++-
>> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-diff.txt b/Documentation/git-diff.txt
>> > index 72179d993c..10c7a2220c 100644
>> > --- a/Documentation/git-diff.txt
>> > +++ b/Documentation/git-diff.txt
>> > @@ -63,7 +63,11 @@ two blob objects, or changes between two files on disk.
>> >
>> > 'git diff' [<options>] <commit>..<commit> [--] [<path>...]::
>> >
>> > - This is synonymous to the previous form. If <commit> on
>> > + This is synonymous to the previous form. However,
>> > + users should prefer the previous form over this form
>> > + as this form may be more confusing due to the same
>> > + notation having a logically conflicting meaning in
>> > + linkgit:git-rev-list[1]-ish commands. If <commit> on
>> > one side is omitted, it will have the same effect as
>> > using HEAD instead.
>>
>> I think we're better off just consistently recommending "A..B" instead
>> of "A B" and "fixing" any occurrence of the latter to the
>> former. I.e. not taking this patch & going in the other direction.
>>
>> As noted in the thread you linked we'll always need ".." when one side
>> is "HEAD" implicitly, and that's a really common case.
>
> You could just type " @" instead of "..". And that one is easier to explain.
Sure, and if we're going to change our docs to consistently use @ at
either side of such ranges instead of the empty string for "HEAD" I
think that's worth discussing if the goal is to get rid of ".." for
"diff".
I'm commenting on the in-between state being more confusing to users,
which is as far as this patch gets us.
>> So as confusing as the whole ".." v.s. "..." is in diff v.s. log I think
>> we're worse off with "A B", since we'll *still* need to document the
>> likes of "A.." and how that differs from log "A.." or "A...".
>>
>> So sometimes using the whitespace form for two revs and then the ".."
>> when we just have one side makes things more confusing, not less. The
>> reader will be left having to juggle more complexity in their head, not
>> less.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-17 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-17 11:09 [PATCH] git-diff.txt: prefer not using <commit>..<commit> Denton Liu
2019-03-17 13:24 ` Duy Nguyen
2019-03-18 6:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-19 1:12 ` Denton Liu
2019-03-21 14:12 ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-03-17 13:40 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-03-17 14:01 ` Duy Nguyen
2019-03-17 14:12 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2019-03-18 6:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-18 17:46 ` Elijah Newren
2019-03-18 19:07 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-03-19 0:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-03-20 14:21 ` Elijah Newren
2019-03-18 17:59 ` Elijah Newren
2019-03-20 17:28 ` Denton Liu
2019-03-21 13:58 ` Elijah Newren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87lg1da8uj.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com \
--to=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=liu.denton@gmail.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=philipoakley@iee.org \
--cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).