From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B871C1F66F for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:26:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727901AbgKCQ0I (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:26:08 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:46288 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726212AbgKCQ0I (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:26:08 -0500 Received: (qmail 6550 invoked by uid 109); 3 Nov 2020 16:26:08 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Nov 2020 16:26:08 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 2204 invoked by uid 111); 3 Nov 2020 16:26:07 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 03 Nov 2020 11:26:07 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:26:07 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Elijah Newren Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] hashmap: add usage documentation explaining hashmap_free[_entries]() Message-ID: <20201103162607.GG444466@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20201030125059.GA3277724@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 12:55:51PM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > > But I think in the current scheme that "free" is somewhat overloaded, > > and if we end with a "clear" and a "free" that seems confusing to me. > > Hmm...there are quite a few calls to hashmap_free() and > hashmap_free_entries() throughout the codebase. I'm wondering if I > should make switching these over to your new naming suggestions a > separate follow-on series from this one, so that if there are any > conflicts with other series it doesn't need to hold these first 10 > patches up. Yeah, it will definitely need a lot of mechanical fix-up. Those kinds of conflicts aren't usually a big deal. Junio will have to resolve them, but if the resolution is easy and mechanical, then it's not likely to hold up either topic. > If I do that, I could also add a patch to convert several callers of > hashmap_init() to use the new HASHMAP_INIT() macro, and another patch > to convert shortlog to using my strset instead of its own. Yeah, both would be nice. I'm happy if it comes as part of the series, or separately on top. -Peff