From: "Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@gmail.com>
To: "Junio C Hamano" <junkio@cox.net>
Cc: "Jay Cliburn" <jacliburn@bellsouth.net>,
git@vger.kernel.org, "Jeff Garzik" <jeff@garzik.org>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: Updated Kernel Hacker's guide to git
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 21:34:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <38b2ab8a0612221234x3832c5bfr1f64caccbb8247b9@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vvek41b29.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On 12/22/06, Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> "Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I think this part is really confusing. For a new comer, saying that:
> >
> > git diff a b == git diff a..b
> >
> > is really not intuitive. Maybe just because adding a new symbol ".."
> > in git diff command line means (for me) that we're doing a special
> > diff. I would never thought by my own that ".." means a simple "to".
>
> We did not originally have "A B"; you were supposed to always
> say "A..B". But all other SCM had "A B" notation, so we added
> support for both because doing so was trivial and there is no
> risk of confusion (because diff is about two points while log is
> about a set). These two notations are interchangeable for
> "diff". If it confuses you, you can stick to the "git diff A B"
> notation. Of if you are like Linus, stick to "A..B" notation.
> Either way, you can pretend that the other notation does not
> even exist and be happy ;-).
>
no, no, I think you miss my point here. What is confusing, and it
seems I'm not the only one to find it confusing, is the fact that
"git diff A B == git diff A..B", not the "A..B" notation per se.
git diff A B, is really intuitive and easy to understand because we
all use to using the diff "A B" notation and it always has worked with
2 endpoints. So I would bet that all newbies who use for the first
time the git diff command will use "A B" notation, not "A..B" one.
> Yes, users often wondered why "git diff" accepts "A B", "git
> log" wants "A..B" and "git log A B" is a disaster. But the root
> cause of the confusion was not about notation but about the
> conceptual difference (two points vs a set).
>
> I do not think changing the meaning of "diff A..B" to what "diff
> A...B" means is a good thing. The notation "..." even _looks_
> like a magic, and in diff context, what it does _is_ magic (it
> is magic in log context, too). You are giving two points, but
But ".." is magic too ! I would really expect something magic to
happen when using the "A..B" notation because I'm a new comer in git
and I never used the "A..B" notation before.
And since I already used this notation when using git log command, I
would expect "git diff A..B" to give the current result given by "git
diff A...B".
But yes, now I have understand that git diff works with end points
unlike git log, I can stick with two notations:
git diff A B
git diff A...B (3 dots)
and I'm happy ;)
thanks
--
Francis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-22 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-21 12:24 Updated Kernel Hacker's guide to git Francis Moreau
2006-12-21 18:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-12-22 1:23 ` Carl Worth
2006-12-22 4:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-12-22 22:20 ` Carl Worth
2006-12-22 22:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-12-22 22:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-12-22 23:31 ` Carl Worth
2006-12-22 23:00 ` Jakub Narebski
2006-12-22 9:35 ` Francis Moreau
2006-12-22 10:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-12-22 20:34 ` Francis Moreau [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-21 3:04 Jeff Garzik
2006-12-21 3:21 ` Jay Cliburn
2006-12-21 7:04 ` Martin Langhoff
2006-12-21 7:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-12-21 7:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-12-21 11:53 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-12-21 5:44 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-12-21 5:53 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-12-21 11:44 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-12-21 21:17 ` Nigel Cunningham
2006-12-21 13:53 ` Francois Romieu
2006-12-21 20:40 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2006-12-21 20:46 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-12-22 8:50 ` Jesper Juhl
2006-12-24 18:07 ` Horst H. von Brand
2007-12-23 11:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-12-23 12:08 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-12-23 12:13 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-12-23 12:20 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-12-23 13:05 ` Dieter Ries
2007-12-23 17:23 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-12-23 20:14 ` Stefan Richter
2007-12-24 14:19 ` Robert P. J. Day
2007-12-23 12:25 ` WANG Cong
2007-12-24 12:50 ` Miklos Vajna
2007-12-25 13:08 ` Salikh Zakirov
2007-12-31 2:50 ` Jan Engelhardt
2007-12-31 11:26 ` Stefan Richter
2007-12-31 17:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-30 2:51 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-06-30 6:27 ` Stefan Richter
2008-06-30 2:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2008-07-03 6:26 ` Christian Couder
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=38b2ab8a0612221234x3832c5bfr1f64caccbb8247b9@mail.gmail.com \
--to=francis.moro@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jacliburn@bellsouth.net \
--cc=jeff@garzik.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).