Junio C Hamano writes:
> Felipe Contreras writes:
>
>>> Hmph, is the above sufficient? I added a case that mimics Stefano's
>>> original regression report (which is handled) and another that uses
>>> doubled "@" for the same purpose of introducing a "funny" hierarchy,
>>> and it appears that "c
Felipe Contreras writes:
>> Hmph, is the above sufficient? I added a case that mimics Stefano's
>> original regression report (which is handled) and another that uses
>> doubled "@" for the same purpose of introducing a "funny" hierarchy,
>> and it appears that "checkout -b" chokes on it.
>
> Th
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Felipe Contreras writes:
>
>> diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
>> index 93197b9..b8ece6e 100644
>> --- a/sha1_name.c
>> +++ b/sha1_name.c
>> @@ -1004,6 +1004,26 @@ int get_sha1_mb(const char *name, unsigned char *sha1)
>> return
Felipe Contreras writes:
> diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
> index 93197b9..b8ece6e 100644
> --- a/sha1_name.c
> +++ b/sha1_name.c
> @@ -1004,6 +1004,26 @@ int get_sha1_mb(const char *name, unsigned char *sha1)
> return st;
> }
>
> +/* parse @something syntax, when 'something' is
Typing 'HEAD' is tedious, especially when we can use '@' instead.
The reason for choosing '@' is that it follows naturally from the
ref@op syntax (e.g. HEAD@{u}), except we have no ref, and no
operation, and when we don't have those, it makes sens to assume
'HEAD'.
So now we can use 'git show @~1
5 matches
Mail list logo
