git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH] BreakingChanges: say that `git diff X..Y` syntax will be removed in 3.0

From
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@google.com>
Date
Oct 16, 2025, 16:38 UTC
Message-ID
<CAESOdVAEN=YeMqozR4438L-U7mZ3nhRnMB5PV_sUPmwuWSkbhQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<xmqqh5vz7ygc.fsf@gitster.g>
On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 at 06:44, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 28 quoted lines
>
> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
>
> >> +Support for "git diff X..Y" syntax will be removed. Use "git diff X Y" instead.
> >> +This will open up the syntax for a more consistent interpretation of
> >> +"git diff $(git merge-base X Y) Y".
> >
> > I feel like this is going to break a whole lot of existing scripts and
> > probably more than a few forges as well.  It seems especially bad that
> > we would add it back in the future with a completely different meaning,
> > since we'll have some people that use 10-year LTS distros that go from,
> > say, Git 2.51 to Git 3.xx, where the latter reintroduces the syntax with
> > different semantics.
> >
> > We've never really changed the meaning of things like revisions or
> > revision-adjacent code in the past and I think those kinds of things
> > we're pretty much stuck with forever.  With that in mind, I don't think
> > this is a good idea.
>
> I do not think X..Y (or X...Y), if accepted by commands, would never
> change their meanings in the middle of the commands' lives.
> Teaching "git diff" to complain and barf on X..Y is a possibility,
> but to do the same for X...Y, we would need to come up with an
> alternative syntax first.
>
> The same for "git checkout master..."  that detaches HEAD at the
> fork point of the current topic (so that I can "git am" in a new
> iteration of patches on top).
I couldn't get this to work:

$ git checkout main... -- fatal: invalid reference: main...

But don't worry about it. I think your point about there being other commands that support the triple-dot syntax is still valid.

>  As the syntax "git diff master..."
> is symmetric with it, if one were to change, both should change to
> the same.
Agreed. Some syntax for getting the merge base revision makes sense.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
Previous: Junio C HamanoNext: Kristoffer Haugsbakk
Message 8 of 14 in “BreakingChanges: say that `git diff X..Y` syntax will be removed in 3.0”
  1. BreakingChanges: say that `git diff X..Y` syntax will be removed in 3.0Martin von Zweigbergk via GitGitGadget, Oct 15, 2025
  2. Junio C HamanoOct 15, 2025
  3. Martin von ZweigbergkOct 15, 2025
  4. Kristoffer HaugsbakkOct 16, 2025
  5. D. Ben KnobleOct 16, 2025
  6. brian m. carlsonOct 15, 2025
  7. Junio C HamanoOct 16, 2025
  8. Martin von ZweigbergkOct 16, 2025
  9. Kristoffer HaugsbakkOct 16, 2025
  10. Martin von ZweigbergkOct 16, 2025
  11. Junio C HamanoOct 16, 2025
  12. D. Ben KnobleOct 16, 2025
  13. Justin ToblerOct 16, 2025
  14. Martin von ZweigbergkOct 16, 2025

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.