Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] refactor(remote): rename query_refspecs functions

>
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:12:00PM +0530, Meet Soni wrote:
> > Rename `query_refspecs()` to `find_refspec_match` for clarity, as it
> > finds a single matching refspec.
> >
> > Rename `query_refspecs_multiple()` to `find_all_refspec_matches` to
> > better reflect that it collects all matching refspecs instead of
> > returning just the first match.
> >
> > Rename `query_matches_negative_refspec()` to
> > `find_negative_refspec_match` for consistency with the updated naming
> > convention.
>
> Okay. The message might've read a tiny bit easier if it was a bulleted
> list of renames. E.g.:
>
>     We're about to move a couple of functions related to handling of
>     refspecs from "remote.c" into "refspec.c". In preparation for this
>     move, rename them to better reflect their intent:
>
>       - `query_refspecs()` becomes `find_refspec_match()` for clarity,
>         as it finds a single matching refspec.
>
>     ...

>
> I was wondering a bit about why we rename the static functions, as we
> wouldn't have to expose them in a subsequent step anyway. Other than
> that I think we should adhere to our coding guidelines with the renamed
> public functions:

>
>     The primary data structure that a subsystem 'S' deals with is called
>     `struct S`. Functions that operate on `struct S` are named
>     `S_<verb>()` and should generally receive a pointer to `struct S` as
>     first parameter. E.g.
>
> So:
>
>   - `query_refspecs()` would be renamed to `refspec_find_match()`.
>
>   - `query_refspecs_multiple()` would be renamed to
>     `refspec_find_all_matches()`.
>
>   - `find_negative_refspec_match()` would be renamed to
>     `refspec_find_negative_match()`.
>
> Patrick