From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5CA2018A for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 15:08:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751902AbcF0PI0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:08:26 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:59316 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751850AbcF0PIZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:08:25 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D139272BA; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:08:24 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=42lWZogrfgFI1QXy8/qIRz8xnGA=; b=dZZc54 XnUyS2h/cbZ1DXTtEK0wrMgTWodk8R9Ur4p93ghnb3X2rdeh+nf/POtDaU7yKuXh TtzZAJoH14vbsW2Y1zYhC0+SaRrPL/n62dCQpD9Fdiaa0Jj2r9h/9eG3SiEg/U5a Ea17pPX12FKXjSmn6OmagYDBpEjz9ySeeL8Vg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=s1TzumuE9sodu8fW/Nu8ZQXtfGDM4h2m B8kSljR4551HDGLGlYyKo0xLDT/jbyXy495aFgQDUNlILTDPTa0HSBE85+lvVfIS +Wb1KI7COcftgAXDs/n1fwOAyQE/4MFWhpQzxpdnD8nA8Q/4WXoIhfQNC9Xm2mdd XeV6Zb/Bi1E= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C1A272B8; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:08:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6973272B5; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 11:08:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Philip Oakley" Cc: "Jeff King" , "Git List" Subject: Re: name for A..B ranges? In-Reply-To: <8001594309A04A42859024BAEB8FF188@PhilipOakley> (Philip Oakley's message of "Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:37:35 +0100") References: <0648000B273C412AB7140AE959EBC99A@PhilipOakley> <20160624160943.GA3170@sigill.intra.peff.net> <8001594309A04A42859024BAEB8FF188@PhilipOakley> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 08:08:21 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FE2DF94C-3C78-11E6-B4A6-EE617A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Philip Oakley" writes: > ..., I was wondering > if an alternative would be to refer to it via [use the headings of] > it's notation, i.e. "the 'two-dot' range notation" (or 'syntax' is > that is preferred), and the "three-dot symmetric difference notation". That's a lot more sensible pair of headings, I would think. > The existing explanatory text can stand as is, but they would now have > a section for readers to find. > > Or should I just drop this? I like the approach to separate them into clearly marked sections. I primarily was reacting to the "single-sided" which nobody would understand.