Re: A few usability question about git diff --cached
- From
Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
- Date
- Oct 4, 2007, 12:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <5ACC5CA7-8314-4035-94EC-190138A25EBD@wincent.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <4d8e3fd30710040527j61152b2dh1b073504ba19d490@mail.gmail.com>
El 4/10/2007, a las 14:27, Paolo Ciarrocchi escribió:
Show 13 quoted lines
> Hi all, > I'm having and interesting discussion with an happy mercurial users > which started reading the git documentation. He raised aquestion that > I'm not able to answer: > >> $ git diff --cached >> >> (Without —cached, git-diff(1) will show you any changes that you've >> made but not yet added to the index.) You can also get a brief >> summary >> of the situation with git-status(1): > > Why do we have the option "--cached" and not "--index"?
I am not an "old timer", but I believe that it's because what we now know as "the index" was original called "the cache". See:
<http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitHistory>
You're probably right that the option name is confusing, I guess changing it to "--index" would be a good idea, continuing to support "--cached" but marking it as deprecated before finally removing it at some point in the future.
Cheers, Wincent