threads / discuss / 12690

The meaning of x~0 and x~ as rev-spec.

Subject: The meaning of x~0 and x~ as rev-spec.

## tl;dr

3 messages between Mar 14, 2008 and Mar 14, 2008.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Sergei Organov· Mar 14, 2008, 13:20 UTC · lore
Hello,

Testing suggests that <name>~0 and <name>~ are the same and are just synonyms for <name> as rev-specs. Is that correct? Is that by design, or by accident?

Shouldn't <name>~0 have [the same] special meaning as <name>^0?
Shouldn't <name>~ be a short-cut for <name>~1, similar to <name>^?

Anyway, I think that at least <name>~0 (useful for scripting) should be explicitly documented, provided that <name>^0 has special (and documented) meaning.

[ The question arose when I wanted to write something like this to automate reverting of a few last revisions:

  for i in 0 1 2 3; do
      git revert -n HEAD~$i
  done
  git commit -a
]
 
-- Sergei.
Junio C Hamano· Mar 14, 2008, 16:24 UTC · re: Sergei Organov · lore

Re: The meaning of x~0 and x~ as rev-spec.

Sergei Organov <osv@javad.com> writes:
> Testing suggests that <name>~0 and <name>~ are the same and are just
> synonyms for <name> as rev-specs. Is that correct? Is that by design, or
> by accident?
sed -n -e '/name~3/,/x = 0;/p' sha1_name.c
Sergei Organov· Mar 14, 2008, 17:21 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: The meaning of x~0 and x~ as rev-spec.

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Sergei Organov <osv@javad.com> writes:
>
>> Testing suggests that <name>~0 and <name>~ are the same and are just
>> synonyms for <name> as rev-specs. Is that correct? Is that by design, or
>> by accident?
>
> sed -n -e '/name~3/,/x = 0;/p' sha1_name.c
OK, I'll send a patch for documentation.
-- Sergei.

← back to recent threads