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

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 05:09:17PM +0100, Andreas Ericsson wrote:

On 2013-11-09 08:05, Christian Couder wrote:

quoted

Here is a big patch series to replace prefixcmp() with a new
has_prefix() function.

Seems like totally useless codechurn to me. Besides, prefixcmp()
ties in nicely with strcmp() and memcmp() (and returns 0 on a
match just like its namesakes), whereas your function must return
non-zero on match and thus can't be used as a qsort() callback.
Granted, prefixcmp() lends itself poorly to that as well, but at
least it's consistent with the other *cmp() functions.

I think you missed the earlier threads that let up to this, but the
summary is that prefixcmp does not really make any sense as a qsort
callback. Consider that comparing "foobar" and "foo" would yield 0, but
"foo" and "foobar" would be positive.

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.

-Peff