Re: git-diff on touched files: bug or feature?

From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@imag.fr>
Date: Aug 2, 2007, 12:05 UTC
Message-ID: <vpq4pji3zwm.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <7vd4y6xnw4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> The default should be tuned for users who perform manual editing
> with status checks.  And power users like yourself who run "bulk
> touch indiscriminately but modify only some" scripts should
> learn to run git-status (or "update-index --refresh") after such
> operation.  Swapping the defaults to optimize for the abnormal
> case is madness.

I fully agree that git should be optimized for the common case. But even for the common case, I also find the feature strange. You didn't answer that part of my message, but I still fail to see a rationale for making "git-diff; git-status" different from "git-status; git-diff".

IOW, why should people running git-status before git-diff not get a reminder if you think people running git-diff without or before git-status should get it?

-- 
Matthieu