Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > But here's the interesting part: it breaks a bunch of tests. They all > seem to be doing things like ":file.txt". In check_filename() right now > we treat that literally. But as a pathspec, it is technically "colon > followed by zero or more magic signature letters", and it is eaten. Hmph. Shouldn't the definition be "colon and then one or more magic signature letters", then? ":file.txt" to name the blob object at path file.txt in the index is fairly common "rev" and it is a shame that it has to become ambiguous with a pathspec element. > So I wonder if we have painted ourselves into a compatibility corner a > bit, if we have two conflicting expectations. We might be better off > just teaching check_filename() to parse multiple of [^/!] and the > trailing colon. It's horrible and not great for maintainability, but > this syntax is not something that changes often. Ah, OK. So the idea is that when given _as_ a pathspec element (e.g., after an explicit "--" separator), we do want to interpret ":file.txt" as the same as "file.txt", but when dwimming to sift revs and pathspec elements apart, prefer to take it as a blob object name in the index? I guess that would work better than the current code (or straight "use the full pathspec parser" approach) from the compatibility viewpoint. Thanks.
