Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Rename suffixcmp() to has_suffix() and invert its result
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
>> The old name followed the pattern anything-cmp(), which suggests
>> a general comparison function suitable for e.g. sorting objects.
>> But this was not the case for suffixcmp().
>
> It's not clear to me that prefixcmp() is usable for sorting objects,
> either. Shouldn't it get the same treatment?
Sounds like a plan for a good follow-up series.
Show 5 quoted lines
> If some day we invent a type for 4-byte-aligned object names, it might
> make sense to do something similar to hashcmp, distinguishing between
> hashcmp for use where ordering is important and something like hash_eq
> when checking for equality (since I suspect the latter can be made
> faster).
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>