Re: [PATCH 00/86] replace prefixcmp() with has_prefix()

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2013, 16:53 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqy54timsm.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131112083240.GA1684@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> I am ambivalent on the code churn, but if we do apply it, we should
> probably leave off the final patch (dropping prefixcmp) for a cycle to
> let topics in flight catch up to the change. Just diffing "master" and
> "next", I see some new uses of prefixcmp which will need adjusted, along
> with spots where the patches themselves will cause textual conflicts.

Yes, I did that check too (but between 'maint' and 'pu'). I think it is a good idea to stop using whatever_cmp() name for things that are not *cmp() functions in the longer term, but smooth migration is a bit tricky (but not as tricky as end-user visible transitions).

Even though we already added has_suffix() for tail matches, it is not too late to rethink, as it is not in 'master' yet.

One thing I noticed is that it is probably misnamed, or at least in a way that invites confusion. Can people tell which one of these is correct without looking at existing callsites?

	has_suffix(filename, "txt");
        has_suffix(filename, ".txt");

The semantics of the function we have is the latter and is better called endswith(), I suspect. And the corresponding function to check for head matches should probably be called beginswith().