From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 15:14:36 +0300
From: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 10/12] vinyl: rename key stmt
 construction routine
Message-ID: <20190221121436.vb6fs2h4tkbubgtf@esperanza>
References: <cover.1550744027.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
 <fb28011a2546828fdb54b7eaa184037c62238da3.1550744027.git.vdavydov.dev@gmail.com>
 <20190221111530.GJ3872@chai>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190221111530.GJ3872@chai>
To: Konstantin Osipov <kostja@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@freelists.org
List-ID: <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 02:15:30PM +0300, Konstantin Osipov wrote:
> * Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@gmail.com> [19/02/21 13:31]:
> > Currently, it's called vy_stmt_new_select, but soon a key statement will
> > be allowed to have any type, not just IPROTO_SELECT. So let's rename it
> > to vy_stmt_new_key. Let's also rename the wrapper vy_key_from_msgpack to
> > vy_stmt_new_key_from_array, because its key feature is that in contrast
> > to vy_stmt_new_key it takes a msgpack array instead of key data + part
> > count.
> 
> I like the new names, vy_stmt_new_key_from_array - maybe
> vy_stmt_new_key_from_msgpack after all?

But vy_stmt_new_key also takes msgpack so we'd have two functions both
taking msgpack, called vy_stmt_new_key and vy_stmt_new_key_from_msgpack.
Looks confusing IMO. Not that it really matters to me. I can rename it
if you think it's OK.