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

[Sergei Organov <osv@javad.com>]

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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?
>

I entirely agree. I just took (maybe erroneously) Junio's answer to my
original question as "this behavior is by design", assuming some
rationale behind it, so submitted the above patch to documentation.

-- Sergei.