Re: Another use of "@"?

On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Duy Nguyen [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Matthieu Moy
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

The A/@ could make sense, but I'm wondering whether we're taking the
direction of implementing some kind of Brainfuck dialect in Git revision
specifiers. I'm not sure we want to add more special characters here and
there with subtly different meanings (@ = HEAD, @{1} = HEAD@{1}, A/@ =
A/$(git symbolic-ref --short HEAD)).

Another subtle overloading of @ that might be desirable (althought
might be achievable another way). "git log -g"  is equal to "git log
-g HEAD" but there is no easy way (that I know of) to do "git log -g
$(git symbolic-ref HEAD)". "@" could fill the inconvenient spot here,
I think. Alias is no good because I won't be able to add extra
options.

I wouldn't mind typing <ref>@{link} that does "git symbolic-ref
<ref>", though. Because ref is optional, "git log -g @{link}" is not
bad. "link" is probably not a good name for this.
--
Duy