From: Vicent Marti <vicent@github.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 19:40:55 GMT
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2013, #05; Thu, 21)
Message-ID: <CAFFjANQni7mvFBuAqJnPpTJ_68+rJKU6KmdRAWbyK_jbi0S=xA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131122172626.GA4881@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> Granted, the way I verified this was checking whether you renamed
>> rlw_xor_run_bit() to something more fitting, so perhaps you just forgot
>> that one thing but did all the rest.
>
> I didn't touch that. Vicent, did you have a comment on the name (it
> really does look like it is a negation, and the only caller is
> ewah_not).

Yes, the name was ported straight from the original library and kept
as-is to make the translation more straightforward. These sources are
--again-- a translation, so I tried to remain as close to the original
Java implementation as possible.

I agree the name is not ideal, but it does make quite a bit of sense.
It effectively inverts the word based on the run bit, which is the
equivalent of xoring it with the bit if it's one.

Love,
vmg