Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] reftable/reader: rename `reftable_new_reader()`

From: Patrick Steinhardt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 07:22:55 +0200

On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 12:09:33PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Justin Tobler <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > On 24/08/19 05:39PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> >> Rename the `reftable_new_reader()` function to `reftable_reader_new()`
> >> to match our coding guidelines.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <[email-masked]>
> >> ---
> > [snip]  
> >> -int init_reader(struct reftable_reader *r, struct reftable_block_source *source,
> >> +int reader_init(struct reftable_reader *r, struct reftable_block_source *source,
> >>  		const char *name);
> >
> > Here we also rename `init_reader()` to `reader_init()`, but do not
> > update its call sites resulting in build errors. Since we remove this in
> > the next patch anyway, let's drop this change.

Well spotted! I originally wanted to fix that function's name, too. But
then I realized it's not even needed in the first place.

> True.  The actual definition of the function is also left
> unmodified.  Let me locally edit the hunk out.  As you pointed out,
> the next step does mention the "new" name in order to remove it, so
> there needs a cascading adjustment there, but the fallout is fairly
> small (see the attached range-diff).

Thanks. The range diff looks as expected to me.

Patrick