[...] >>>> int >>>> -virStoragePoolSourceAdapterParseValidate(virStoragePoolDefPtr ret) >>>> +virStorageAdapterParseValidate(virStoragePoolDefPtr ret) >>> >>> This function should take a virStoragePoolSourceAdapterPtr rather than >>> virStoragePoolDefPtr, and the name should just be >>> "virStorageAdapterValidate(), since the parsing is already finished, and >>> this function just validates. >>> >> I'd prefer to use virStorageAdapterValidateParse() - as that what it's >> doing validating that the parse was correct. So is this is a case where >> a verb can turn into an adverb? (it's a grammar question!) > > Yeah, that name makes sense once you explain it. Maybe. Is it really > validating that the parse was done correctly? Or is it just validating that > the data in the object meets various criteria? Seems like it's the latter. > Would you really want to validate the object any differently if it had just > been parsed from XML vs. if the object was generated in some other manner? > (e.g. some chunk of C code that created the object and filled in attributes > programmatically) >
Fair enough - I'll just change to Validate, but while working through merge conflicts in my branch I ran into virDomainDiskDefParseValidate It's a change that wasn't sent with this series, but I think I know now where I got the name originally. John -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
