From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [RFD} Use regex's in :/ revision naming machinery Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:55:48 +0200 Message-ID: <4BBAE904.6010105@viscovery.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 06 09:56:11 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nz3do-0002QD-9n for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:56:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757366Ab0DFHz5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2010 03:55:57 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:51590 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757280Ab0DFHz4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2010 03:55:56 -0400 Received: from cpe228-254.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=theia.linz.viscovery) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nz3dV-0006rj-Ct; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:55:49 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by theia.linz.viscovery (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FEE1660F; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 09:55:49 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 4/6/2010 1:00, schrieb Linus Torvalds: > I never use ':/', and part of it is that it's so horribly cumbersome. I'd > _like_ to use it to do things like > > gitk :/slabh.. Rhethoric question: Do you mean history _starting_ at the commit that contains "slabh" or _ending_ at the commit that contains "slabh" followed by two arbitrary characters? If :/ is pattern-ized in some way, then IMO pattern matching syntax would be more use-friendly than (extended) regular expresssions, particluarly also because the single-character wildcard would be ? and avoid the otherwise overloaded dot. -- Hannes