From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 17:40:14 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] lockfile: remove some redundant functions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0d17c04842bef618ecd474c56f2dbcf6a613a379.1433751986.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Michael Haggerty writes: > Remove the following functions and rewrite their callers to use the > equivalent tempfile functions directly: > > * fdopen_lock_file() -> fdopen_tempfile() > * reopen_lock_file() -> reopen_tempfile() > * close_lock_file() -> close_tempfile() Hmph, My knee-jerk reaction was "I thought lockfile abstraction was fine---why do we expose the implementation detail of the lockfile, which is now happen to be implemented on top of the tempfile API, to the callers?" I guess that was also where my comments on 02/14 "why do callers have to include tempfile.h separately?" came from. I'm undecided but would trust your judgement until I read thru to the end of the series ;-).