Hi Eric & Junio, On Fri, 8 Jan 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > With this change, code such as: > > > > for (i = has_dos_drive_prefix(src); i > 0; i--) > > ... > > > > in path.c reads a bit oddly. Renaming the function might help. For instance: > > > > for (i = dos_drive_prefix_len(src); i > 0; i--) > > ... > > Renaming may be unnecessary churn, but I do not think we mind an > additional synonym, e.g. > > #define has_dos_drive_prefix(x) dos_drive_prefix_len(x) > > if some people prefer. I am actually not so sure about this: if I read `dos_drive_prefix_len(path)` I would have assumed the return value to be -1 if `path` does not, in fact, have a DOS drive prefix. Sure, returning the length of the DOS drive prefix when just asking whether it has one is a bit surprising at first, but it also makes sense: we already have that information, so we might just as well use it. In any case, I think this change (if it is really considered desirable) could easily be an add-on patch by people who care about this ;-) Ciao, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html