Re: stash clear, was Re: git: avoiding merges, rebasing

[Miles Bader]

Johannes Schindelin <address@hidden> writes:
> Instead, how about writing a stash pop?  "git stash pop [<stash>]".  It 
> would literally just call git stash apply && git reflog delete.  Should 
> not be too difficult, now that I provided "git reflog delete" ;-)
>
> Maybe even deprecating "git stash clear", or doing away with it 
> altogether.

That would match my usual usage well.

Actually, I really like the way the tla (arch) "undo" and "redo"
commands work:  "tla undo" is roughly equivalent to "git stash", but by
default chooses a name with an appended integer which is one greater
than the greatest existing "stash" (to use git terminology).  "tla redo"
by default applies the last saved value and deletes it.  So basically
push and pop.  Usually, of course, you only use one level, but on the
occasions when you want more, it feels very natural.

I dunno how this would work with stash, but push/pop functionality would
be good...

-Miles

-- 
Saa, shall we dance?  (from a dance-class advertisement)