From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp59.i.mail.ru (smtp59.i.mail.ru [217.69.128.39])
 (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 82F76469719
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri,  9 Oct 2020 04:10:46 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 04:11:02 +0300
From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <20201009011102.idolx3rnrk67mt43@tkn_work_nb>
References: <cover.1600955781.git.tsafin@tarantool.org>
 <e54cb665e54d3233024e625f2c12c0625bf5468a.1600955781.git.tsafin@tarantool.org>
 <8f0dfb00-0dbe-6717-1c36-90957a072751@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8f0dfb00-0dbe-6717-1c36-90957a072751@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2.X 1/7] module api: export
 box_tuple_validate
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

> > +int
> > +box_tuple_validate(box_tuple_format_t *format, box_tuple_t *tuple);
> 
> 2. OCD mode on. I would propose either make tuple the first
> argument, or rename it to box_tuple_format_validate_tuple().
> So as to be consistent with our agreement, that if something
> is a method of <type>, then the <type> argument goes first,
> and the method name is <type>_<action>.
> 
> I see we currently have in the public API the functions:
> 
> 	box_tuple_validate - your new function, a bit
> 		inconsistent.
> 
> 	box_tuple_validate_key_parts - this should have been
> 		box_key_def_validate_tuple from the beginning,
> 		but we can't do anything about it now.

We can. It is part of my patchset.

> 
> 	box_key_def_validate_key - correct. Key_def goes first,
> 		and the name is consistent.
> 
> So if you will make box_tuple_validate consistent, we will have
> more correct signatures (2/3) than incorrect, for validation
> methods at least.

So, if we'll apply all your suggestions, the key_def module API will
contain the following functions:

 | Function                     | Consumer        | Name variants (for history)     |
 | ---------------------------- | --------------- | ------------------------------- |
 | box_key_def_new()            | already present |                                 |
 | box_key_part_def_create()    | key_def module  |                                 |
 | box_key_def_new_v2()         | key_def module  | box_key_def_new_ex()            |
 | box_key_def_dump_parts()     | key_def module  |                                 |
 | box_key_def_merge()          | key_def module  |                                 |
 | box_key_def_dup()            | merger module   |                                 |
 | box_key_def_delete()         | already present |                                 |
 | box_key_def_validate_tuple() | key_def module  | box_tuple_validate_key_parts()  |
 | box_tuple_compare()          | already present |                                 |
 | box_tuple_compare_with_key() | already present |                                 |
 | box_key_def_extract_key()    | key_def module  | box_tuple_extract_key_{ex,v2}() |
 | box_key_def_validate_key()   | key_def module  |                                 |

All functions around key_defs and tuples are prefixed with 'box_key_def_',
except box_tuple_compare*(), which are already present.

If we'll follow current internal naming:

 | Function                       | Name variants (may fit better) |
 | ------------------------------ | ------------------------------ |
 | box_key_def_new()              |                                |
 | box_key_part_def_create()      |                                |
 | box_key_def_new_v2()           |                                |
 | box_key_def_dump_parts()       |                                |
 | box_key_def_merge()            |                                |
 | box_key_def_dup()              |                                |
 | box_key_def_delete()           |                                |
 | box_tuple_validate_key_parts() | box_tuple_validate_key()       |
 | box_tuple_compare()            |                                |
 | box_tuple_compare_with_key()   |                                |
 | box_tuple_extract_key_v2()     |                                |
 | box_key_def_validate_key()     | box_validate_key()             |

Here functions that operate on key_def itself are prefixed with
'box_key_def_', but functions that operate on tuples using a key
definition are named 'box_tuple_<action>()' (generally, see below).

The exception is box_key_def_validate_key(), but we can rename it to
box_validate_key(). And also drop '_parts' from
box_tuple_validate_key_parts() (because it meaningless):

 | Function                       |
 | ------------------------------ |
 | box_key_def_new()              |
 | box_key_part_def_create()      |
 | box_key_def_new_v2()           |
 | box_key_def_dump_parts()       |
 | box_key_def_merge()            |
 | box_key_def_dup()              |
 | box_key_def_delete()           |
 | box_tuple_validate_key()       |
 | box_tuple_compare()            |
 | box_tuple_compare_with_key()   |
 | box_tuple_extract_key_v2()     |
 | box_validate_key()             |

Isn't that nice?