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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_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 CE37A20954 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 02:22:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752249AbdKWCWV (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:22:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:64345 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752231AbdKWCWU (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:22:20 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9D7A0369; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:22:20 -0500 (EST) 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=09p+BuFa8M+S9rJIzSgy76fs5G4=; b=Nfe+M/ 4QjSxh7ED0Qhk7KvjqjqB4I85XR/aLxJX53b+DRltJ8zPqzXOsaGB9qvqorpf2Hc OH61D+3CWroX8XQxGNqxtBYnzJjM7vlDfz5yhgXQuMeIQJ7hAmGbkM2NoedInZpS fwM2KoG1PVBiSl+dcraH/QvV0vHTuFhuL/Ehk= 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=tUpU8npi+ZXdmE00xdFaQD962QYOHuJc Zf/1izWO1vJMeeOWtFcWeDVa1PEK9RWU3ajXSXoAokDQOtPF7rKIIU7/j6dY8FY9 VpUZtwBsmQAwerdC1GQ0Gydj0YpyfF8n+Bo1LcyY3uwtFap0glPrtJr9sugsHJ4H 2FVPUEzx5h0= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6375FA0368; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:22:20 -0500 (EST) 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 D9237A0364; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 21:22:19 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Kevin Daudt , "Robert P. J. Day" , Git Mailing list Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gitcli: tweak "man gitcli" for clarity References: <20171121214552.GB16418@alpha.vpn.ikke.info> <20171123000346.GA8718@sigill> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 11:22:18 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20171123000346.GA8718@sigill> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 22 Nov 2017 19:03:46 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 21CC0252-CFF5-11E7-B5F4-575F0C78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I read the rest of the thread, and I think the question here is not > about Git's behavior, but about parsing this sentence. > > Without a "--" Git can sometimes do what you want. Or it may error out, > if what you asked for is ambiguous. And that sentence is trying to cover > those cases separately, and the "can" only applies to the ambiguous > case. > > It's pretty clear to me as it is, but maybe we can write it differently. > Like: > > Without a disambiguating `--`, Git makes a reasonable guess. If it > cannot guess (because your request is ambiguous), then it will error > out. Splitting it into two sentences like you did makes it even clearer, I would think.