Re: [PATCH 3/3] mingw: document the experimental standard handle redirection

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> >> > I feel this is the wrong way round. `>/dev/null` may sound very intuitive
> >> > to you, but this feature is Windows only. Guess three times how intuitive
> >> > it sounds to Windows developers to write `>/dev/null` if you want to
> >> > suppress output...
> >> 
> >> It would be just as intuitive to write '2>&1' for dup-redirection,
> >
> > No. You misunderstand. I was mainly concerned with the `/dev/null`. Every
> > Windows developer knows what `>file.txt` means, and many know what
> > `2>error.txt` means. But `/dev/null` is not Windows, period.
> 
> Actually I did know that much.  
> 
> If I was correct in assuming that "2>&1" is just as foreign as
> ">/dev/null", then we should be shunning "2>&1" just like we shun
> ">/dev/null".  That was all I meant to say.

> Are you saying "2>&1" is just as likely to be known as ">file.txt"
> and my assumption of foreignness of "2>&1" was incorrect?
> 
> 	Side note: would ">NUL" look more familiar, I wonder, and
> 	can stand for ">/dev/null" for the target audience?
> 
> > ... It is so not
> > Windows that Git itself translates it to `NUL` (which you Linux die-hards
> > won't have a clue about, I would wager a bet).
> 
> Ah, you lost your bet.  When can I collect ;-)?