Max Horn <> writes:

> +1 for the change. I find the resulting code easier to understand, too.
> ...
> Taking one step back, shouldn't the commit message rather explain
> the new status, instead of referring so much to the past? If I
> imagine somebody reading this in a year, they might not even know
> suffixcmp (e.g. if they joined the project after this patch was
> merged).
> How about something like this:
> --- 8< ----
> Rename suffixcmp() to has_suffix() and invert its result
> Now has_suffix() returns 1 when the suffix is present and 0 otherwise.
> The old name followed the pattern anything-cmp(), which suggests
> a general comparison function suitable for e.g. sorting objects.
> But this was not the case for suffixcmp().

Yes, much more concise and to the point.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to