From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 06:24:27 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] revert: Introduce skip-all to cleanup sequencer data
Message-ID: <BANLkTimy17b-F7eg+R9ReRUrx0rhA1cumg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vtybj6ji2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi Junio,

Junio C Hamano writes:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> diff --git a/builtin/revert.c b/builtin/revert.c
>> index 5c0b97e..eb68068 100644
>> --- a/builtin/revert.c
>> +++ b/builtin/revert.c
>> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ enum replay_action { REVERT, CHERRY_PICK };
>>  struct replay_opts {
>>       enum replay_action action;
>>
>> +     /* --skip-all */
>> +     int skipall_oper;
>
> Yikes what is that "oper" doing there?  Don't truncate a word in the
> middle only to shorten names and make it unclear what you want to say. Is
> that operand? operation? In this case, I think "int skip_all" is
> sufficient, and you can lose the comment that adds no extra information.

Interesting side note: I'd initially wanted to use "skip_all" and
"continue", but "continue" is a C keyword.  That's why I'd reluctantly
suffixed "_oper" to both for consistency.

-- Ram