From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 19:12:48 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Rename suffixcmp() to has_suffix() and inverse its result
Message-ID: <xmqqd2meaci7.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <C9A6A1E9-E08C-4C9B-B18D-CED751ACB975@quendi.de>

Max Horn <max@quendi.de> writes:

> +1 for the change. I find the resulting code easier to understand, too.
> ...
>
> Taking one step back, shouldn't the commit message rather explain
> the new status, instead of referring so much to the past? If I
> imagine somebody reading this in a year, they might not even know
> suffixcmp (e.g. if they joined the project after this patch was
> merged).
>
> How about something like this:
>
> --- 8< ----
>
> Rename suffixcmp() to has_suffix() and invert its result
>
> Now has_suffix() returns 1 when the suffix is present and 0 otherwise.
>
> 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().

Yes, much more concise and to the point.