Kyle J. McKay wrote: > That change was made as a result of this feedback: > > On Jul 6, 2013, at 17:11, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Kyle McKay wrote: >> >>> The temp_is_locked function can be used to determine whether >>> or not a given name previously passed to temp_acquire is >>> currently locked. >> [...] >>> +=item temp_is_locked ( NAME ) >>> + >>> +Returns true if the file mapped to C<NAME> is currently locked. >>> + >>> +If true is returned, an attempt to C<temp_acquire()> the same >> > [snip] > >> Looking more closely, it looks like this is factoring out the idiom >> for checking if a name is already in use from the _temp_cache >> function. Would it make sense for _temp_cache to call this helper? > > So I think the answer is it does not make sense for _temp_cache to > call this helper.
Thanks for looking into it. Sorry for the confusion. The point of my question was an example of a way to make sure the internal API stays easy to understand. But it seems to have backfired, and this is a small enough isolated change that I think it's okay to say "let's clean it up later". > Will release a v4 in just a moment with that single change reverted. Thanks. -- 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
