Re: [PATCH 03/10] reftable/reader: rename `reftable_new_reader()`

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Aug 23, 2024, 05:22 UTC
Message-ID: <Zsgcr6MkBbXSQlBA@tanuki>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqbk1kqsr6.fsf@gitster.g>

On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 12:09:33PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 16 quoted lines

> Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On 24/08/19 05:39PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> >> Rename the `reftable_new_reader()` function to `reftable_reader_new()`
> >> to match our coding guidelines.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> >> ---
> > [snip]  
> >> -int init_reader(struct reftable_reader *r, struct reftable_block_source *source,
> >> +int reader_init(struct reftable_reader *r, struct reftable_block_source *source,
> >>  		const char *name);
> >
> > Here we also rename `init_reader()` to `reader_init()`, but do not
> > update its call sites resulting in build errors. Since we remove this in
> > the next patch anyway, let's drop this change.

Well spotted! I originally wanted to fix that function's name, too. But then I realized it's not even needed in the first place.

Show 5 quoted lines

> True.  The actual definition of the function is also left
> unmodified.  Let me locally edit the hunk out.  As you pointed out,
> the next step does mention the "new" name in order to remove it, so
> there needs a cascading adjustment there, but the fallout is fairly
> small (see the attached range-diff).

Thanks. The range diff looks as expected to me.

Patrick