At Wed, 29 Dec 2010 22:05:46 +0000, Philip Jackson wrote: > > At Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:43:25 -0900, > Dave Abrahams wrote: > > > > Alright, and what about making 'X' context dependent instead? > > > > Let me see if I understand that scenario: > > > > `x' on a commit resets to that commit but leaves the working tree > > `X' not on a commit discards the working tree > > `X' on a commit discards the working tree and resets to that > > commit (i.e. --hard) > > > > Makes perfect sense to me. I guess the obvious question is: > > > > `x' not on a commit does ???? > > I detect a smidgen of sarcasm...
Not really; that's just the question that occurred to me. > Personally I don't think we need a commit based hard reset. I'd say x > RET X is fine for the cases you need to do one, a bit safer too. Also makes perfect sense. However, I find a full hard reset to be much more commonly useful than what `x' does. In fact, I don't think I've ever really wanted the current behavior of `x'. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
