Johannes Sixt <j...@kdbg.org> writes: > And the reason for this is that we always told people "don't use seq" > and they submitted an updated patch. What would we have to do now? We > have to tell them "don't use seq, use test_seq". Therefore, the patch > does not accomplish anything useful, IMO. > > The function should really just be named 'seq'. > > Or how about this strategy: > ... > but it is not my favorite.
Why not? That implementation looks like a logical and natural consequence of "should relly just be named 'seq'" suggestion. Having said that, we already say "don't use cmp, use test_cmp", so it might not be such a big deal, even though I find the reasoning in the first paragraph I quoted above from your message quite sane and convincing to me. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
