Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Except for saving some typing, is there any benefit to stash over local branches?

In other words, shouldn't git just fix ux for branches and rip out stash?




So "some typing" would be:

    # git stash:
    prev_ref="$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD)"
    git checkout -b wip-stash
    git add .
    git commit -m 'wip stuff'
    git checkout "$prev_ref"
    
    # git stash pop:
    git checkout wip-stash -- .
    git checkout -D wip-stash
It's quite a considerable saving. I suppose by "fix UX" you mean make it so the saving would be less anyway, but I think really they're just conceptually different:

    - branch: pointer to a line of history, i.e. a commit and inherently its ancestors
    - stash: a single commit-like dump of patches
If stashing disappeared from git tomorrow, I think I'd use orphan commits rather than branches to replace it.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: