Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Adding string_list_sort_u which sorts a list then deduplicates it.

>
> Amisha Chhajed <amishhhaaaa@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > string_list_remove_duplicates is almost always preceeded by
> > string_list_sort, hence adding string_list_sort_u which dedupliactes
> > post sorting.
>
> The usual way to compose a log message of this project is to
>
>  - Give an observation on how the current system works in the
>    present tense (so no need to say "Currently X is Y", or
>    "Previously X was Y" to describe the state before your change;
>    just "X is Y" is enough), and discuss what you perceive as a
>    problem in it.
>
>  - Propose a solution (optional---often, problem description
>    trivially leads to an obvious solution in reader's minds).
>
>  - Give commands to somebody editing the codebase to "make it so",
>    instead of saying "This commit does X".
>
> in this order.
>
> To those who have been intimately following the discussion, it often
> is understandable without some of the above, but we are not writing
> for those who review the patches.  We are primarily writing for future
> readers of "git log" who are not aware of the review discussion we
> have on list, so we should give something to prepare them by setting
> the stage and stating the objective first, before going into how the
> patch solved it.
>
> With that in mind, perhaps something along this line ...
>
>
>     Subject: string-list: add string_list_sort_u() that mimics "sort -u"
>
>     Many callsites of string_list_remove_duplicates() call it
>     immediately after calling string_list_sort().  It is
>     understandable because the former requires the string-list to be
>     sorted, but at the same time, it is clear that these places are
>     sorting only to remove duplicates and for no other reason.
>
>     Introduce a helper function string_list_sort_u() that combines
>     these two calls that often appear together, to help simplify
>     these callsites.
>
> ... probably?
>
> The same comment applies to the way the other patch is explained.
>
> Thanks.
>