From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDE1D1FD99 for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 17:21:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753070AbcHZRV3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:21:29 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:56564 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752476AbcHZRV2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:21:28 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B8FC373D0; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:21:27 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=sf0Zafrnt31uZFhpCsx4WehgQa8=; b=C1HNWK ysldIPwo9R42TYmBYWy1GDwPiJoWTkqqHMoRrjkEqJr0LxIxQMCwkyyjjgl7i+1z EGaQK6rZ2hMntfsNwrO3rXot9B2WLOVKGZtyL/Nq19ATepRwD9XCn0rwEBMoTzSU p0JRdZTeQn0wY53lv094CurfPqJolFn71ug/o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=iv5liwudOC+JgU+t7zY0Z8mDkvfcpdED rcGGPoPlJctcHAZgFij4XCWSUyRoVCt41VQB25Uenfz6JAOqmLPc5XfpaNbH9z+V bQuciZXu8gxCF/pVJ4k1Nw32RHq6EV4Z7nPhRagpbft73skpkJSyVUcaMgjRBW4k fTxm1uiwxsk= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5361B373CF; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:21:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3B21373CE; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:21:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Lars Schneider Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, sbeller@google.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, jnareb@gmail.com, mlbright@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/13] pkt-line: add functions to read/write flush terminated packet streams References: <20160825110752.31581-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160825110752.31581-7-larsxschneider@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:21:24 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Lars Schneider's message of "Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:13:35 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 85328266-6BB1-11E6-A877-F7BB12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Lars Schneider writes: > OK, what function names would be more clear from your point of view? > > write_packetized_stream_from_fd() > write_packetized_stream_from_buf() > read_packetized_stream_to_buf() Would write_packetized_from_fd() write_packetized_from_buf() read_packetized_to_buf() be shorter, still understandable, be consistent with the existing convention to name write_/read_ a function that shuffles bytes via a file descriptor, and to the point, perhaps?