Re: read_config_file() is missleading

["Yoshinori K. Okuji" <okuji@enbug.org>]

On Saturday 02 February 2008 13:14, Yoshinori K. Okuji wrote:
> On Friday 01 February 2008 20:58, Robert Millan wrote:
> > The following function name:
> >
> >   normal/main.c:read_config_file (const char *config, int nested)
> >
> > is missleading.  It does actually execute the config file, not just
> > read it.  Does it seem fine to rename it?
> >
> > How about `process_config_file' ?
> >
> > Or maybe I am missing something.
>
> I think the initial idea was that read_config_file would only read a file,
> then a menu would be executed by another function. But it is not for some
> reason. I forget why. Maybe it didn't make sense to separate the
> functionality into two functions. I am not sure.
>
> If you can think of any reason that we should separate the functionality,
> you can make process_config or something like that. Otherwise, it is fine
> for me to rename the function.

I was mistaken. It really depends on the meaning of "execute". For me, 
executing a menu means analyzing the menu structure, displaying it, 
controlling user inputs, and so on. read_menu_config does not execute a menu 
in this sense.

But, of course, it executes commands in a config file.

Okuji