Re: [PATCH 5/9] Refactor excluded and path_excluded

> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 2, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Adam Spiers <git@adamspiers.org> wrote:
>>>  extern void path_exclude_check_init(struct path_exclude_check *, struct dir_struct *);
>>>  extern void path_exclude_check_clear(struct path_exclude_check *);
>>> +extern struct exclude *path_excluded_1(struct path_exclude_check *, const char *,
>>> +                                      int namelen, int *dtype);
>>>  extern int path_excluded(struct path_exclude_check *, const char *, int namelen, int *dtype);
>>
>> Exported functions should have nicer names than *_1. No idea what are
>> better names though, maybe exclude_path?
>
> Which part is better?
>
> Just like between path_excluded_1() and path_excluded() nobody can
> tell how they differ (except perhaps the former smells more special
> purpose thanks to its funny name) and wouldn't be able to tell which
> one to call without looking at their sources, it is hard to tell
> path_excluded() and exclude_path() apart.  In a sense, that pair is
> even worse as there is no hint to suggest which one is more exotic
> between them in their names.