On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 12:12:00PM +0530, Meet Soni wrote:
> Rename `query_refspecs()` to `find_refspec_match` for clarity, as it
> finds a single matching refspec.
>
> Rename `query_refspecs_multiple()` to `find_all_refspec_matches` to
> better reflect that it collects all matching refspecs instead of
> returning just the first match.
>
> Rename `query_matches_negative_refspec()` to
> `find_negative_refspec_match` for consistency with the updated naming
> convention.
Okay. The message might've read a tiny bit easier if it was a bulleted
list of renames. E.g.:
We're about to move a couple of functions related to handling of
refspecs from "remote.c" into "refspec.c". In preparation for this
move, rename them to better reflect their intent:
- `query_refspecs()` becomes `find_refspec_match()` for clarity,
as it finds a single matching refspec.
...
I was wondering a bit about why we rename the static functions, as we
wouldn't have to expose them in a subsequent step anyway. Other than
that I think we should adhere to our coding guidelines with the renamed
public functions:
The primary data structure that a subsystem 'S' deals with is called
`struct S`. Functions that operate on `struct S` are named
`S_<verb>()` and should generally receive a pointer to `struct S` as
first parameter. E.g.
So:
- `query_refspecs()` would be renamed to `refspec_find_match()`.
- `query_refspecs_multiple()` would be renamed to
`refspec_find_all_matches()`.
- `find_negative_refspec_match()` would be renamed to
`refspec_find_negative_match()`.
Patrick
