Re: [lmi] Delete local git branch

[Greg Chicares]

On 2020-07-15 15:22, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 14:51:37 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> 
> wrote:

[...locally removing one of two similarly-named branches...]

> GC> Now I can use tab completion without that risk.
> 
>  I'm afraid I still don't understand what this risk actually is. Surely you
> can't accidentally operate on xanadu/whatever instead of whatever? I.e.,
> even if TAB completes to xanadu/something (which normally would require
> typing at least "x" in the beginning already), could you really not notice
> it somehow?

/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$git merge xanadu/census-view-<Tab>

Depressing <Tab> multiple times makes zsh cycle through the
(several) available completions. I know that today I don't want
  xanadu/census-view-columns-opt
  xanadu/census-view-optimize
so I'll keep cycling through until I get to one that contains
"grid", but I might pick the wrong "grid" one.

You seem enviably immune to such confusion. I know I'm not.
To me, this list seems to have three (not four) distinct members:
  xanadu/census-view-columns-opt
  xanadu/census-view-grid
  xanadu/census-view-only-grid
  xanadu/census-view-optimize
of which the middle one matches /census-view-.*grid/
and I'm sure to stumble over that. Cf.:

https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lmi/2018-05/msg00039.html
| Evidently our parsers differ: maybe yours recognizes word boundaries,
| whereas mine is tuned to something like Levenshtein distance, so I see:
|   for(col = col; col < col; col) {col}
| and my eyes glaze over.

https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lmi/2017-02/msg00031.html
| yes, I was confused,
| but only because there's so little lexical distance between
|   explicit instantiation definition  = e31n
|   explicit instantiation declaration = e32n
| It says that an explicit instantiation d8n forces instantiation, so
| I guessed that an explicit instantiation d9n might do what I wanted.

"A man's got to know his limitations."