Re: [PATCH v3] Add new @ shortcut for HEAD

> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> So HEAD@{0}~0^0 is too much to type, but we can remove '^0', and we can
>>>> remove '~0', and we can remove 'HEAD', which leaves us with @{0}, but we
>>>> can't remove '{0}'?
>>>>
>>>> This patch allows '@' to be the same as 'HEAD'.
>>>
>>> While the above reasoning is cute, it is misleading.
>>>
>>> If you start from HEAD@{1}~0^0, we can remove '^0', we can remove
>>> '~0', but you cannot remove HEAD from the remaining "HEAD@{1}"
>>> without changing what it means.  @{1} is where the current branch
>>> was, while HEAD@{1} is where you were---they are different when you
>>> have just did "git checkout anotherbranch".  HEAD@{1} is the tip of
>>> your previous branch, @{1} is where anotherbranch was before its tip
>>> became the commit you have checked out.
>>
>> Replace @{1} with @{u} and it holds.
>
> Yes and no.  Starting from HEAD@{u}~0^0, we can remove ^0 and ~0,
> and you remove HEAD from the remaining "HEAD@{u}" to get @{u} and
> all of them still mean the same thing.  It is the other branch your
> current branch is integrating with.
>
> But that decomposition does not get you to HEAD which is the final
> destination you want to reach.  As soon as you drop the remaining
> {u}, it suddenly changes the meaning and start referring to the
> current branch.

>>> So I'd suggest toning it down, perhaps something like this:
>>>
>>>         Even though we often can do without having to type "HEAD",
>>>         e.g. "git log origin.." substitutes missing RHS with "HEAD",
>>>         sometimes we still do need to type "HEAD" (thats six f*cking
>>>         keystrokes "Caps Lock", "H", "E", "A", "D" and finally "Caps
>>>         Lock").
>>
>> I don't know what RHS means, and I don't use caps lock :)
>
> "right hand side"?  You can say "Hold down Shift", H, E, A, D and
> "Release Shift" ;-).

>>>         That is four keystrokes too many to name an often needed
>>>         reference.  Make "@" usable as its synonym.
>>
>> Yeah, that's nice, but doesn't explain why "@", and why not something else.
>
> The thing is, HEAD@{0}~0^0 nor HEAD@{u}~0^0 is not a valid
> explanation why it is "@", either.

> But that does _not_ mean "@" is a good choice.  Nor the explanation
> has to be based on the "starting from this and strip" progression.
>
> "@" is already special and is familiar to users when specifying a
> ref, and that is a good enough reason (you can of course say that in
> the log message).