Re: [PATCH 0/6] strbuf cleanups
- From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 2, 2023, 23:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <6451a200e17d8_200ae294ed@chronos.notmuch>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqildaxt5l.fsf@gitster.g>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > > > But if we were moving in that direction, I have to wonder if some of > > these functions also need to be renamed to lose their strbuf_ > > prefix. > > Just to avoid misunderstanding. I do not mean to suggest renaming > these inside this series. It would make things too noisy and even > more distracting. But in the longer term, as we treat strbuf more > and more as one of our basic data structures, it would make sense to > lose strbuf_ from functions that are thrown out of strbuf.[ch] with > this series, and reserve the prefix to functions that are left in > strbuf.[ch], i.e. those that are about string operations.
I thought precisely the same thing: 1) it's good to move them away, 2) they should lose the "strbuf_" prefix, 3) that doesn't need to happen in this series.
-- Felipe Contreras