From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 18:14:12 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] revision: introduce ref@{N..M} syntax. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vbqm36mv6.fsf_-_@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > This allows you to add between Nth and Mth (inclusive) reflog entries. > "git show master@{1} master@{2} master@{3}" is equivalent to > "git show master@{1..3}". Well, logically, if you do that, then you should also allow git log master@{one.week.ago..yesterday} as a reflog expression. "Because It Only Makes Sense(tm)". Linus PS. Yeah, I'm only half serious. I like our revision parsing, and the above _would_ actually be consistent with the "master@{1..3}" kind of specification, but at the same time, it's also obviously more complex, and maybe it's not THAT usable. But I think the "master@{date..date}" syntax would actually fall out automatically if you did the {x..y} parsing at a higher level and didn't