From: Thiago Farina <tfransosi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:59:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] Refactor excluded and path_excluded
Message-ID: <CACnwZYe19r9mefDmAQtuE5NU4jw033fc_i4JvMZUgtMUkNgEOw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8Aq7Sodm1_k2kAmfajHG4wP76xHCshDGPfiLYfzuNwWaA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> We could introduce exclude_path() and kill path_excluded() then. There
>>> are just about 5-6 call sites to replace.
>>
>> The name path_excluded(... path ...) sounds like it is asking a
>> yes/no question "is this path excluded?", which actually is what is
>> going on.
>>
>> The name exclude_path(... path ...) sounds as if you are requesting
>> somebody to exclude the path.  Does that meaning match the semantics
>> of the function?
>
> I'm not great at naming. And path_excluded() cannot be reused to avoid
> problems with other ongoing series if any. So path_is_excluded()?

is_path_excluded()?