Re: [PATCH] git-reset.txt: Use commit~1 notation over commit^

> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 09:55:03AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we need to also fix "git name-rev master^" which currently does
>> not try to reduce "master~1" to "master^".
>
> This patch does it:
>
> diff --git a/builtin/name-rev.c b/builtin/name-rev.c
> index c946a82..417bae5 100644
> --- a/builtin/name-rev.c
> +++ b/builtin/name-rev.c
> @@ -142,8 +142,12 @@ static const char *get_rev_name(const struct object *o)
>  		int len = strlen(n->tip_name);
>  		if (len > 2 && !strcmp(n->tip_name + len - 2, "^0"))
>  			len -= 2;
> -		snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), "%.*s~%d", len, n->tip_name,
> -				n->generation);
> +		if (n->generation == 1)
> +			snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), "%.*s^", len,
> +				 n->tip_name);
> +		else
> +			snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), "%.*s~%d", len,
> +				 n->tip_name, n->generation);
>  
>  		return buffer;
>  	}
>
> but I am not sure the results are always more readable. I think "foo^"
> is perhaps nicer than "foo~1". But in more complex examples, I kind of
> think the ~1 is easier to read. E.g.:
>
>   # old
>   $ git name-rev 9904fadf
>   9904fadf tags/v1.7.3-rc2~1^2~1
>
>   # new
>   $ git name-rev 9904fadf
>   9904fadf tags/v1.7.3-rc2~1^2^

> Somehow the visual appearance of "^2^" ends up being more confusing to
> me than ~1^2~1, I guess because in the latter there is a regular set of
> modifier-number pairs.
>
> But I admit that is just my subjective opinion.
>
> -Peff