{"thread":{"id":"59659","subject":"[PATCH] revisions.txt: correct a mistake in dotted range notations section","startedAt":"2023-04-26T07:45:59Z","lastAt":"2023-05-02T16:57:43Z","messageCount":4,"participants":["Pooyan Khanjankhani via GitGitGadget","Junio C Hamano","Chris Torek","Felipe Contreras"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"476093","messageId":"pull.1485.git.git.1682495081131.gitgitgadget@gmail.com","threadId":"59659","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] revisions.txt: correct a mistake in dotted range notations section","fromName":"Pooyan Khanjankhani via GitGitGadget","fromEmail":"gitgitgadget@gmail.com","sentAt":"2023-04-26T07:44:41Z","receivedAt":"2023-04-26T07:45:59Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"name:Pooyan Khanjankhani","avatar":null},"body":"From: Pooyan Khanjankhani <p.khanjankhani@digikala.com>\n\nInsert a missing 'not' word in a negative sentence.\n  ... but are [not] reachable from neither A or C.\n\nSigned-off-by: Pooyan Khanjankhani <p.khanjankhani@digikala.com>\n---\n    docs: Fix sentencing\n    \n    Just fixed a sentence in docs.\n\nPublished-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-1485%2FTheKhanj%2Fdocs%2Fsentencing-v1\nFetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-1485/TheKhanj/docs/sentencing-v1\nPull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/1485\n\n Documentation/revisions.txt | 2 +-\n 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt\nindex 9aa58052bc7..00c2f030da5 100644\n--- a/Documentation/revisions.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt\n@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ other, e.g.\n \n does *not* specify two revision ranges for most commands.  Instead\n it will name a single connected set of commits, i.e. those that are\n-reachable from either B or D but are reachable from neither A or C.\n+reachable from either B or D but are not reachable from neither A or C.\n In a linear history like this:\n \n     ---A---B---o---o---C---D\n\nbase-commit: ae73b2c8f1da39c39335ee76a0f95857712c22a7\n-- \ngitgitgadget\n"},{"id":"476119","messageId":"xmqqo7natwvh.fsf@gitster.g","threadId":"59659","inReplyTo":"pull.1485.git.git.1682495081131.gitgitgadget@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] revisions.txt: correct a mistake in dotted range notations section","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2023-04-26T16:46:10Z","receivedAt":"2023-04-26T16:46:18Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"\"Pooyan Khanjankhani via GitGitGadget\" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>\nwrites:\n\n>      $ git log A..B C..D\n>\n>  does *not* specify two revision ranges for most commands.  Instead\n>  it will name a single connected set of commits, i.e. those that are\n> -reachable from either B or D but are reachable from neither A or C.\n> +reachable from either B or D but are not reachable from neither A or C.\n>  In a linear history like this:\n>  \n>      ---A---B---o---o---C---D\n>\n> because A and B are reachable from C, the revision range specified\n> by these two dotted ranges is a single commit D.\n\nIsn't that an unwanted double negative?\n\nThe first hit I got about \"neither double negation\" on Google search\nwas:\n\nhttps://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/either_or_neither_nor_double_negative.htm\n\nbut the source of this might sound more authoritative:\n\nhttps://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/neither-neither-nor-and-not-either_2\n\n"},{"id":"476153","messageId":"CAPx1GverCci3SZQEMvFX_q7r3XSTKmPizfcj8QcvGNud7reY9g@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"59659","inReplyTo":"pull.1485.git.git.1682495081131.gitgitgadget@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] revisions.txt: correct a mistake in dotted range notations section","fromName":"Chris Torek","fromEmail":"chris.torek@gmail.com","sentAt":"2023-04-26T21:16:28Z","receivedAt":"2023-04-26T21:16:47Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"chris.torek@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/16826774?v=4"},"body":"On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 1:00 AM Pooyan Khanjankhani via GitGitGadget\n<gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:\n> From: Pooyan Khanjankhani <p.khanjankhani@digikala.com>\n>\n> Insert a missing 'not' word in a negative sentence.\n>   ... but are [not] reachable from neither A or C.\n\nThere's a peculiarity of the English language here that means you\nshould not use the word \"not\". The actual error is using \"or\" as\nthe conjunction, instead of \"nor\": the construct should read\n\"neither <alternative 1> nor <alternative 2>\", and it means that\nboth alternatives are rejected.\n\nThat said, there's almost certainly a reformulation that uses\nlanguage less-confusing to non-native speakers.  Perhaps\nthis is better (I haven't actually made a commit of this, it's just\na diff in place):\n\ndiff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt\nindex 9aa58052bc..5460820377 100644\n--- a/Documentation/revisions.txt\n+++ b/Documentation/revisions.txt\n@@ -305,14 +305,14 @@ other, e.g.\n     $ git log A..B C..D\n\n does *not* specify two revision ranges for most commands.  Instead\n-it will name a single connected set of commits, i.e. those that are\n-reachable from either B or D but are reachable from neither A or C.\n-In a linear history like this:\n+it will name a single connected set of commits: those that are\n+reachable from either B or D, but not reachable from either A or C.\n+For example, in a linear history like this:\n\n     ---A---B---o---o---C---D\n\n because A and B are reachable from C, the revision range specified\n-by these two dotted ranges is a single commit D.\n+by these two dotted ranges is the single commit D.\n\n\n Other <rev>{caret} Parent Shorthand Notations\n\n\nChris\n"},{"id":"476438","messageId":"64514101af396_1ba2d294cd@chronos.notmuch","threadId":"59659","inReplyTo":"CAPx1GverCci3SZQEMvFX_q7r3XSTKmPizfcj8QcvGNud7reY9g@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [PATCH] revisions.txt: correct a mistake in dotted range notations section","fromName":"Felipe Contreras","fromEmail":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","sentAt":"2023-05-02T16:57:37Z","receivedAt":"2023-05-02T16:57:43Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"felipe.contreras@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/8358?v=4"},"body":"Chris Torek wrote:\n> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 1:00 AM Pooyan Khanjankhani via GitGitGadget\n> <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:\n> > From: Pooyan Khanjankhani <p.khanjankhani@digikala.com>\n> >\n> > Insert a missing 'not' word in a negative sentence.\n> >   ... but are [not] reachable from neither A or C.\n> \n> There's a peculiarity of the English language here that means you\n> should not use the word \"not\". The actual error is using \"or\" as\n> the conjunction, instead of \"nor\": the construct should read\n> \"neither <alternative 1> nor <alternative 2>\", and it means that\n> both alternatives are rejected.\n\nBut it's not the same to say \"not reachable from either A or C\", and\n\"reachable from neither A nor C\". In the latter if a commit is reachable\nfrom X (or anything other than A or C), it should be included.\n\nSo A~ would be included, because it's reachable from B and reachable\nfrom not A (i.e. B).\n\nIt should be \"not reachable from either A or C\".\n\nCheers.\n\n-- \nFelipe Contreras"}]}