Re: [PATCH 1/3] ls-tree: make <tree-ish> optional
- Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 10:01:09 -0700
- From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ls-tree: make <tree-ish> optional
Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> I'd prefer *not* to have such a DWIM in a command like ls-tree, aka
>> plumbing commands, where predictability is worth 1000 times more
>> than ease of typing.
> Fair enough. However, what if no <tree-ish> or <path> are specified,
> though -- would you be okay with the HEAD being assumed instead of
> erroring out in that case?
If we wrote ls-tree to do so 12 years ago, then I wouldn't have
opposed. Changing the behaviour now? Not so sure if it is worth
having to worry about updating the code, docs and making sure we
spot all the possible typoes.