From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Haggerty Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/19] Rename struct git_attr_check to git_attr_value Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 05:20:29 +0200 Message-ID: <4E3A0FFD.7010604@alum.mit.edu> References: <1311828418-2676-1-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu> <1311828418-2676-20-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu> <7vsjpjg6k7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 04 05:20:39 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QooUA-0004T8-SN for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 05:20:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756016Ab1HDDUf (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:20:35 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:39435 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755371Ab1HDDUd (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:20:33 -0400 X-Envelope-From: mhagger@alum.mit.edu Received: from [192.168.69.133] (p54BEB339.dip.t-dialin.net [84.190.179.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id p743KTD3026467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 05:20:30 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 In-Reply-To: <7vsjpjg6k7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Thanks for the good feedback. On 08/02/2011 05:46 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael Haggerty writes: > >> This described its purpose better, especially when used with >> git_allattrs(). > > You probably meant s/described/describes/ but more importantly does it > really? It is a structure used to probe into the attributes system for the > state of various attributes on a path, and the set of possible states > includes "there is no value" (aka unset), so it feels actively wrong to > call it attr_value and that is why I didn't call it in the first place. I don't think it is so unusual for a "value" object to be able to reflect the fact that the value is unset, but I can understand your point of view too. I will omit this renaming in the re-roll. > I also think git_all_attrs() (i.e. word-break underscore after "all") is > more in line with the naming throughout the codebase, after looking at > output from > > $ git grep -e _all'[a-z]' --and --not -e alloc -e _all_ -- '*.c' > > Other than these, and the earlier comment about the copy&paste done from > git_checkattr (which by the way should probably be "git_check_attr"), it > seems that the series mostly consist of good clean-ups and an addition of > a new and (probably) useful feature that is straightforward. Nice. I thought the name was awkward, too, but I chose it to be consistent with git_checkattr(). So in the re-roll I will happily rename both functions. Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/