From: Junio C Hamano
>
> Antoine Pelisse writes:
>
>> I'm not exactly sure I understand the point of not squashing all those
>> patches together ?
>> It's not like one is going without the others, or that the commit
>> message provides some new information (except for the name of the
>> file, bu
Antoine Pelisse writes:
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Christian Couder
> wrote:
>> To avoid spamming the list again, I am going to send the following
>> patches from the 86 patch long series to replace prefixcmp() with
>> starts_with():
>>
>> [PATCH v2 00/86] replace prefixcmp() with start
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Christian Couder
wrote:
> To avoid spamming the list again, I am going to send the following
> patches from the 86 patch long series to replace prefixcmp() with
> starts_with():
>
> [PATCH v2 00/86] replace prefixcmp() with starts_with()
> [PATCH v2 01/86] strbuf:
From: Jonathan Nieder
> Christian Couder wrote:
>
>> And in vcs-svn/fast_export.c there was already an ends_with()
>> function that did the same thing. Let's used the renamed one
>> while at it.
>
> Yes, despite the change in signature this shouldn't slow anything
> down. Thanks.
>
> For what
Christian Couder wrote:
> Now ends_with() returns 1 when the suffix is present and 0 otherwise.
Sounds good.
[...]
> And in vcs-svn/fast_export.c there was already an ends_with()
> function that did the same thing. Let's used the renamed one
> while at it.
Yes, despite the change in signature t
Now ends_with() returns 1 when the suffix is present and 0 otherwise.
The old name followed the pattern anything-cmp(), which suggests
a general comparison function suitable for e.g. sorting objects.
But this was not the case for suffixcmp().
Some popular programming languages have functions or m
6 matches
Mail list logo
