cmd_struct

Hi,

Would be too churn/noise (at this point) to rename cmd_struct to builtin_cmd?

I know "Why" question could come, but I prefer to not answer it if I can.

Regards,

Hi,

Thiago Farina wrote:

The answer depends on the "why". (Not "why do you ask?", but "why rename --- what benefit would it bring?")

Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Thiago Farina <tfransosi@gmail.com> wrote:

The name has served us well, I do not see a compelling reason to change it to anything else, and I suspect the name stayed unchanged because nobody else found such a reason, either.

So... if you are unwilling to make a compelling case telling us why the current name does not work, I do not think it is likely that anybody finds such a change necessary, welcome, or even tolerable.

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Having said that, I would agree that if I were writing git.c from scratch today, I would have done

	static struct builtin_cmd builtin_cmd[] = { ...

insead of the current

	static struct cmd_struct commands[] = { ...

just because I think it makes more sense. But that reason suggests it is a mere code churn of no value, after all these years.

"Because the non-POSIX non-ANSI-C platform I am porting for stomps on the end-user program's namespace, and cmd_struct is one of the victims" could be a reason that is better than "just because I think it makes more sense", but even then, there would probably be a better ways other than renaming the symbols in end-user code (i.e. Git) to solve such a name clash.

Hi Thiago,

On 2015-05-14 01:10, Thiago Farina wrote:

It would be too much churn/noise, but I prefer not to describe why, if I can.

*grins*

Ciao, Dscho