Hi Stefan, On Tue, 17 Jul 2018, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > > It's nice to see that the bulk of the range-diff functionality has > > > been libified in this re-roll (residing in range-diff.c rather than > > > > Can we *please* stop calling it "re-roll"? Thanks. > > Fun fact of the day: > > First appearance of "reroll" in the public archive is (09 Dec 2007) > https://public-inbox.org/git/7vy7c3ogu2....@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org/ > which is predated by "re-roll" (05 May 2006) > https://public-inbox.org/git/7vr738w8t4....@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net/ Real fun fact of the day: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reroll says Verb reroll (third-person singular simple present rerolls, present participle rerolling, simple past and past participle rerolled) 1. To roll again. A player who rolls two sixes can reroll the dice for an additional turn. 2. (programming) To convert (an unrolled instruction sequence) back into a loop. quotations ▼ Noun reroll (plural rerolls) (dice games) A situation in the rules of certain dice games where a player is given the option to reroll an undesirable roll of the dice. You will notice how this does not list *any* hint at referring to something that Junio calls "reroll". Likewise, I have to admit that Wiktionary's idea of an "iteration" disagrees with *my* use of the term. The correct term would be "revision" (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/revision). But we, the core Git contributors, in our collective infinite wisdom, chose to use that term as yet another way to refer to a commit [*1*]. So we got it all wrong, believe it or not. Ciao, Dscho Footnote *1*: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/commit#Noun does not even bother to acknowledge our use of referring to a snapshot of a source code base as a "commit".
