Re: [PATCH v2] Detailed diagnosis when parsing an object name fails.

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+extern int get_sha1_with_mode_1(const char *str, unsigned char *sha1, unsigned *mode, int fatal, const char *prefix);

Do I understand correctly that "fatal" here is the same as "!gently"
elsewhere in the API?

It seems it is. I renamed it.

This was a pure question, not a suggestion to change it (we do name a
function do_foo_gently() when there is do_foo() that does the same but
reports errors more noisily, though).  I found the name "fatal" a bit
confusing as I at first couldn't tell if the caller was telling the
function that it already detected a "fatal" error (and telling the
function to report the fatalness) and didn't realize that the caller is
instead saying "if you find an error, treat it as a fatal one" until I
read it again.

I am Ok with the new "gently" name with the negative semantics as well (I
see no need to change it back to "error_is_fatal").

Thanks.