From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp39.i.mail.ru (smtp39.i.mail.ru [94.100.177.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E57CC4429E1 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 20:54:07 +0300 (MSK) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 20:53:20 +0300 From: Alexander Turenko Message-ID: <20200617175320.nr7yw2w4baxpzzd2@tkn_work_nb> References: <12754f9b68359f80c41ea655d1a25028e1a72cca.1591028838.git.alexander.turenko@tarantool.org> <20200607165753.mcraz7eh3zhtgpco@tkn_work_nb> <20200616115907.GV5745@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200616115907.GV5745@tarantool.org> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/3] merger: drop luaL prefix where contract allows it List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Munkin Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, Vladislav Shpilevoy > As for me I see a mess with the naming already exists: > * What is the rule for using prefix? I see its common usage for > "exported" merger API functions (e.g. , > , ) but > you also use it for helper routine. How come? It should be luaT, agreed. But I finally decided to don't touch names within this patchset. > * There is a auxiliary function with no > Tarantool specifics underneath. Thereby it ought to be named with > prefix instead of one as you mentioned here[1]. Looks > like another naming rule "violation", doesn't it? However, you left > this one unchanged. It operates on struct merge_source, so the naming here looks reasonable for me. > > I'll CC Igor to see what will look worthful for him. > > I'm not fussy here (it's an old code) and we don't have strict naming > policy for now, so let's discard these changes until we made any > decision regarding #4577. Considering Vlad's and your objections, it seems it is not worth to touch these names. I reverted the renames, but kept API comments and luaL_merge_source_tuple_fetch() arguments reordering. I squashed those changes into the main commit ('merger: fix NULL dereference when called via iproto'). Added the following notes to the commit message: | Added API comments for destroy() and next() virtual methods to uniform | them visually with other merge source functions. | | Changed order of luaL_merge_source_tuple_fetch() arguments to unify it | with other functions (, ). WBR, Alexander Turenko.