Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Git.pm: add new temp_is_locked function
- From
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jul 18, 2013, 19:35 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130718193552.GU14690@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <842D3E63-9E6B-45F0-A7F6-03082C4D067F@gmail.com>
Kyle J. McKay wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> That change was made as a result of this feedback: > > On Jul 6, 2013, at 17:11, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Kyle McKay wrote: >> >>> The temp_is_locked function can be used to determine whether >>> or not a given name previously passed to temp_acquire is >>> currently locked. >> [...] >>> +=item temp_is_locked ( NAME ) >>> + >>> +Returns true if the file mapped to C<NAME> is currently locked. >>> + >>> +If true is returned, an attempt to C<temp_acquire()> the same >> > [snip] > >> Looking more closely, it looks like this is factoring out the idiom >> for checking if a name is already in use from the _temp_cache >> function. Would it make sense for _temp_cache to call this helper? > > So I think the answer is it does not make sense for _temp_cache to > call this helper.
Thanks for looking into it.
Sorry for the confusion. The point of my question was an example of a way to make sure the internal API stays easy to understand. But it seems to have backfired, and this is a small enough isolated change that I think it's okay to say "let's clean it up later".
> Will release a v4 in just a moment with that single change reverted.
Thanks.