Re: [PATCH 2/2] dir: improve naming of oid_stat fields in two structs

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> The potential for confusion with "path to these files" is real, I
> would think, so they may benefit from some prefix.
>
> But instead of basing the prefix on their type, can we name it after
> what this struct holds about the excludes file, and what the data
> the struct holds is used for?  Is "oidst" something that conveys it
> well to the readers of the code?
> ...
> In a sense, this struct is a pared down version of cache_entry that
> keeps the filesystem stat data to allow us quickly find if the path
> was modified, and also lets us know if two contents are the same
> without comparing bytes.  It is a mechanism for us to tell validity
> of our cached data.  "struct path_validity" perhaps?  I dunno.

I think "path_validity", while it probably is much better than
"oid_stat", is a horrible name for the struct, so I'd welcome
suggestions from third-party ;-)

But I think renaming "ss_info_exclude" to "info_exclude_validity"
(or any name that talks about "info/exclude" and "validity") would
be a vast improvement, regardless of what the struct is called.