Re: Better usability of stash refs

> To drop a stash, I have to do this (example):
> 
> $ git stash drop stash@{3}
> 
> Using the full "stash@{N}" seems superfluous since the documentation
> states it must be a stash in the first place. It would make more sense
> (and be quicker to type) to do:
> 
> $ git stash drop 3
> 
> Is there a trick I can use to make this shorthand possible? I thought
> about creating a "s" script for "stash" that intercepted the
> parameters for only a couple of stash sub-commands and created the
> ref, but that seems a lot of work.
> 
> Any productivity tips here? Thanks in advance.