Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2018, #02; Tue, 13)

[Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:11 AM, Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com> wrote:
> On 02/13, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> * bw/c-plus-plus (2018-01-30) 37 commits
>>  - replace: rename 'new' variables
>>  - trailer: rename 'template' variables
>>  - tempfile: rename 'template' variables
>>  - wrapper: rename 'template' variables
>>  - environment: rename 'namespace' variables
>>  - diff: rename 'template' variables
>>  - environment: rename 'template' variables
>>  - init-db: rename 'template' variables
>>  - unpack-trees: rename 'new' variables
>>  - trailer: rename 'new' variables
>>  - submodule: rename 'new' variables
>>  - split-index: rename 'new' variables
>>  - remote: rename 'new' variables
>>  - ref-filter: rename 'new' variables
>>  - read-cache: rename 'new' variables
>>  - line-log: rename 'new' variables
>>  - imap-send: rename 'new' variables
>>  - http: rename 'new' variables
>>  - entry: rename 'new' variables
>>  - diffcore-delta: rename 'new' variables
>>  - diff: rename 'new' variables
>>  - diff-lib: rename 'new' variable
>>  - commit: rename 'new' variables
>>  - combine-diff: rename 'new' variables
>>  - remote: rename 'new' variables
>>  - reflog: rename 'new' variables
>>  - pack-redundant: rename 'new' variables
>>  - help: rename 'new' variables
>>  - checkout: rename 'new' variables
>>  - apply: rename 'new' variables
>>  - apply: rename 'try' variables
>>  - diff: rename 'this' variables
>>  - rev-parse: rename 'this' variable
>>  - pack-objects: rename 'this' variables
>>  - blame: rename 'this' variables
>>  - object: rename function 'typename' to 'type_name'
>>  - object_info: change member name from 'typename' to 'type_name'
>>
>>  I do not mind refraining from using these keywords in a foreign
>>  language in our codebase too much, but at the same time, renaming
>>  must be done a bit more thoughtfully.  When the original uses 'new'
>>  together with and in contrast to 'old', renaming 'new' must be done
>>  while preserving the pairing (which may involve renaming 'old' as
>>  well), for example.
>>
>>  Backburnered, i.e. will drop if other topics start to conflict with
>>  it, but will accept rerolls.
>
> I was under the impression that people didn't care too much about this
> (which is a shame but that's an opinion :).

I care, so you are free to change your opinion. :)

> If people were more
> interested in a change like this then I'd be happy to go back through
> and rename the 'old' variables too.

Quoting Duy from a neighboring refactor thread:

  My stand is a bit more aggressive. We should try to achieve better
  [clean code] if possible. But if it makes [Brandon's] life hell, it's not
  worth doing. Converting to ['C++' compatible] is already a step
  forward. Actually if it discourages him from finishing this work, it's
  already not worth doing.

:-)

https://public-inbox.org/git/CACsJy8CPKESE8atc_eWdNVknQYp9T6ebwKwCdzLHyaFKH2BnZA@mail.gmail.com/

So if you can pick up the work to even make it consistent with old/new
variable names, this would be huge!

Thanks,
Stefan