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=-9.5 required=3.0 tests=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 823E21FEAA for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 19:49:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751674AbcFYTtV (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:49:21 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:52354 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751623AbcFYTtU (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:49:20 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE0C24819; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:49:19 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=JH5G8pVHhmtL1K2TARJH0ABmsno=; b=sL1V4/ khmxyka2lFQZJmMEyUtb4Mb6vmDtEsRsFZLaV5Ktxc0tBS3DfazlhfGXr6aaJ2XV j8IQlarr+gj0CJl8CsmxHGRB5Jfgy+X5+7Q1TOTtE7xrykOpprQEs7VIXOxeqziI FUEw+7YZw8EM2ZXiFybo/HmLc6BUkm2t81DCs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=xb/UowQbrC5jZWTxvKjrMi9kfHKulH0D F9CZJFvQxSd7iilPskioAKLi6fWEIUhZO8RR8ufjz/q5kIP8FACewaEzSCKrtZ9J ajlsBgZuL6P0Ajq6gu9LKhCq8Bu9CgoQ53keFy2BWfFIDGxwUTYUogFI6kt3+HzH wskkC1UCLHk= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6412724817; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:49:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CED7A24816; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:49:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Philip Oakley" Cc: "Jeff King" , "Git List" Subject: Re: name for A..B ranges? References: <0648000B273C412AB7140AE959EBC99A@PhilipOakley> <20160624160943.GA3170@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 12:49:16 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Philip Oakley's message of "Sat, 25 Jun 2016 14:50:16 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E7A88F28-3B0D-11E6-AA90-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Philip Oakley" writes: >> Yup, I think "range" is the commonly used word in discussions here. >> When inventing A...B as a new thing in addition to A..B, we called >> the former "symmetric difference", and what is implied by that is >> the latter is "asymmetric difference"; we do not say that unless we >> are contrasting between the two, though. >> > I asked because the man page does indicae that it (A..B) is a special > sort of revison range and "there is a shorthand for it", but then > didn't have a way of naming it. I do not see "is a special sort of revision range" improved in your two patches, though. Knowing that A..B is merely a short-hand for ^A B is important to understand how revision ranges work (e.g. "A..B C" is not "union of A..B and C"), so I think it is worth addressing if the existing description appeared to you that it may confuse readers. > The symmetric difference is then brought in as a further similar > notation. There are a number of Stackoverflow questions about the > differences betwee 'two dots' and 'three dots' as well, so having a > word/phrase for it could help. > > I was thinking that maybe "single-sided difference (two dots)" maybe > one choice that is relatively neutral (or even a "two-dot range"...). When contrasting .. and ..., we have always used "asymmetric" vs "symmetric". I'd prefer to see usnot invent new phrase nobody has used, which leads to unnecessary confusion and learning burden.