From: Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net>
To: Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
Cc: "bug-gnulib@gnu.org List" <bug-gnulib@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: hash, xhash: modernize
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 18:09:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8g5KERCwO_KJpaTy=LDY3SQaAMTKpuqXeGVqzSFz2gKfYObw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+8g5KG38FNZsj0unSDMipRFKMoxGtZ3nJR5LgQ_brS9WwwirQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 6:07 PM Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net> wrote:
> [I wrote this two or so days ago, but see now somehow I failed to send it]
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 2:58 PM Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org> wrote:
> > It has been reported today that looking at the 'hash' module made Marc guess
> > incorrectly what is desired coding style and terminology in Gnulib.
>
> I do not desire to standardize on the coding style suggested by these
> diffs, so perhaps you should say "desired by some".
>
> I tried to make it clear the last time we discussed this (long ago!)
> that I prefer to keep certain comments very near the function
> definition (and implementation).
>
> I disagree with the premise that hash_delete should be renamed. That's
> an API-breaking change.
>
>
> > 1) regarding where to documented exported functions of a module
> > <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2020-10/msg00050.html>
> > 2) regarding C++ interoperability,
> > 3) regarding terminology ("delete" vs. "remove")
> > <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2020-10/msg00091.html>
> >
> > Here are proposed patches to modernize the 'hash' and 'xhash' modules in
> > this respect.
That said, I will not object to your normalizing diffs.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-17 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-11 21:58 hash, xhash: modernize Bruno Haible
2020-10-17 1:03 ` Bruno Haible
2020-10-17 1:07 ` Jim Meyering
2020-10-17 1:09 ` Jim Meyering [this message]
2020-10-17 2:32 ` Bruno Haible
2020-10-17 3:45 ` Jim Meyering
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CA+8g5KERCwO_KJpaTy=LDY3SQaAMTKpuqXeGVqzSFz2gKfYObw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jim@meyering.net \
--cc=bruno@clisp.org \
--cc=bug-gnulib@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).