Re: [PATCH] git-diff: Add --staged as a synonym for --cached.

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2008, 01:11 UTC
Message-ID: <7vljvr2hjn.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <ee77f5c20811101537u6061e5b4w420e9692e0cefad3@mail.gmail.com>

"David Symonds" <dsymonds@gmail.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>
>> And I am not proposing a change here (except to perhaps "git diff
>> --staged" instead of "--cached"). Just pointing out that it does not
>> follow the "--staged operates on both, --staged-only operates on just
>> the index" rule.
>
> So apart from the wider discussion, I think this patch by itself is a
> nice step forward towards improving the UI of this part of git. Is
> there any further discussion on this one alone?

I do not think anybody is fundamentally opposed to introduce a consistent set of new synonyms. I do not think anybody disagrees that the word "stage" will be involved in that set, either.

I however have a suspicion that people would regret having applied this "diff --staged" patch, after they realize that other commands need two options "--staged-only" and "--staged-too", and would wish this patch were to introduce a synonym "diff --staged-only", not "diff --staged", for uniformity's sake.

I doubt "Is there any further discussion on THIS ONE ALONE?" is a valid question to ask. What are the other command options we are introducing synonyms for? There is no need for two variants of staged for "diff" (you don't have --staged-too option but instead you give a committish argument, e.g. HEAD), so --staged-only can be abbreviated to --staged without risking any ambiguity. But at least a fully-spelled-out --staged-only should also be accepted, shouldn't it?