Re: clarification of `rev-list --no-walk ^<rev>`?

From: "Junio C Hamano" <redacted>

"Philip Oakley" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

    Philip probably has a
confused notion that "rev-list A..B C..D" is somehow a union of set
A..B and C..D?

That wasn't the issue. Though it does beg the question that it's the
same as "rev-list D B ^A ^C" isn't it?

If you think it begs the question, then you haven't understood what
I meant by all of the explanation.  Let me repeat:

Apologies. We appear to be having an British/American usage 
misunderstanding. Locally, the answer to the begged (rhetorically asked) 
question is, as you say, "Yes, they are the same". It was simply confirming 
our common understanding.

"A..B C..D" is exactly a short-hand for "^A B ^C D" which is
the same as ANY permutation like "D B ^A ^C".

regards,
Philip