From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:00:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Introduce BEL<branch> as shortcut to the tracked branch
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0903201455130.6865@intel-tinevez-2-302>
In-Reply-To: <237967ef0903200553v58af40b5sfbfa0bbb1f9d96eb@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Mikael Magnusson wrote:

> 2009/3/20 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Santi Béjar wrote:
> >
> >> 2009/3/20 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
> >>
> >> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> El 20/3/2009, a las 10:29, Johannes Schindelin escribió:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Often, it is quite interesting to inspect the branch tracked by a
> >> >> >given branch.  This patch introduces a nice notation to get at the
> >> >> >tracked branch: 'BEL<branch>' can be used to access that tracked
> >> >> >branch.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >A special shortcut 'BEL' refers to the branch tracked by the current
> >> >> >branch.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Suggested by Pasky and Shawn.
> >> >>
> >> >> What does BEL actually stand for? I read Shawn's suggestion, but it's
> >> >> not immediately clear to me what "BEL" means.
> >> >
> >> > It is the ASCII "bell" character, 007 (I always wanted to write that
> >> > magic identifier into a patch).
> >> >
> >> > FWIW you could type it in a regular ANSI terminal using Control-v
> >> > Control-g.
> >>
> >> Can we use branch^{origin} instead? It is longer to type, but uses the
> >> same syntax as the ^{tree}, ^{commit}, ^{tag} and you don't have to know
> >> how to produce the bell character.
> >
> > I think I addressed that issue already.  (Summary: I do not like it)
> >
> > Let me spell it out if it was not obvious yet: the BEL patch was meant as
> > a more or less funny reminder that the issue is not solved and that I need
> > help.
> 
> Would :%:foo work? I thought about the reserved prefix :/! , but :/!! 
> isn't reserved so I don't think that would work. And it's pretty 
> annoying to type too.

Or maybe :%foo?

That would have a rather nasty interaction with code I have in my tree to 
refer to the cache-trees via ':<path>', but I guess I can live with that.

Ciao,
Dscho