From: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 08:10:57 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/32] doc hash-function-transition: Augment compatObjectFormat with readCompatMap
Message-ID: <ZQFukZ4q2Ehen8Yn@ugly>
In-Reply-To: <87msxr8uc1.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 07:11:26AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> writes:
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 06:46:19PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>+The difference between compatObjectFormat and readCompatMap would be that
>>>+compatObjectFormat would ask git to read existing maps, but would not ask
>>>+git to write or create them.
>>> 
>> the argument makes sense, but the asymmetry in the naming bugs me. in particular
>> "[read]compatMap" seems too non-descript.
>
>I am open to suggestions for better names.
>
isn't readCompatObjectFormat an obvious choice?
(and for symmetry, the other then would be writeCompatObjectFormat, i 
guess.)

regards