Re: [PATCH] git stash: one bug and one feature request

From: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
Date: Jan 4, 2008, 18:34 UTC
Message-ID: <477E7C3D.8030501@nrlssc.navy.mil>
In-Reply-To: <e5bfff550801041005x3ab682dam8535c7bde75038dc@mail.gmail.com>

Marco Costalba wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Jan 4, 2008 7:00 PM, Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil> wrote:
>> Marco Costalba wrote:
>>> Ok, drop is better then clear, but, if we need to add a new command I
>>> vote for 'delete' or 'rm' to be consistent with git naming.
>> If the stash list is thought of as a stack, then drop makes sense.
>>
> 
> Yes, but is _not_ as a stack because you can say
> 
> git stash apply stash@{3}
> git stash apply stash@{1}
> git stash apply stash@{4}
> 
> i.e. you can access reflogs in any order, so thinking to a stack is
> misleading IMHO.

I think it is like a stack because new things are always added to the top and shift everything else down. i.e. we can't say 'git stash replace stash@{3}' and we probably wouldn't want to.

When we call git stash, the previous item on 'top' is pushed down so that it is the second item stash@{1}. The new item just stashed (pushed), is now on top at stash@{0}.

Doesn't seem like too far of a stretch.

-brandon