Re: Shorthand for "$(git merge-base A B)"

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 18, 2019, 05:27 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqva0g4uri.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190315212312.GA51592@google.com>

Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

> John Passaro wrote:
>
>> I find myself fairly frequently doing something like "git log $(git
>> merge-base A B)..C".
>
> Hm.  Can you tell me more about the workflow / higher-level operation
> where you do this?

Yes indeed, that would be interesting to learn. I can think of reasons why "git log ^A ^B C" may be useful, but I do not think of a case in which "git log --not $(git merge-base A B) --not C" [*1*] would become useful.

[Footnote]

*1* As there can be more than one merge-base between A and B, the
 right way to write what John wanted to write is to do the above.
 A single "--not" says "until you see another --not, take all the
 positive one from the command line as negative and vice versa".
 You can also write it as "git log C --not $(git merge-base A B)".