From: Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com>
To: Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de>,
notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] Split notmuch_database_close into two functions
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:37:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pqb64uuf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120416215112.15615.94985@thinkbox.jade-hamburg.de>
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012, Justus Winter <4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de> wrote:
> Quoting Mark Walters (2012-03-31 19:17:15)
>> Secondly, I think the patch series could be made clearer and easier to
>> review. If you do it in three steps
>>
>> 1) change of notmuch_database_close to notmuch_database_destroy (just
>> the function name change)
>> 2) split the new notmuch_database_destroy into two as in the current
>> first patch
>> 3) Make any changes (if there are any) of notmuch_database_destroy to
>> notmuch_database_close.
>>
>> The advantage is that the first change is easy to test (essentially does
>> it build) and then changes from notmuch_database_destroy to
>> notmuch_database_close in step 3 are explicit rather than the current
>> situation where we need to grep the code to see if some instances of
>> notmuch_database_close were not changed to notmuch_database_destroy.
>
> I don't buy it. The patch series first touches the library and
> documentation and the lib compiles fine. The next patch updates the
> cli tools, all of them compile fine afterwards.
>
> Every patch addresses the issue component wise, this seems rather
> natural for me.
I will try an explain my concern better. I assume that the patch
actually introduces a functional change : that is something somewhere in
the code calls the new notmuch_database_close instead of
notmuch_database_destroy [1]. In your current patch series someone
reading the patches alone can't see the functional change: it comes from
the occurrences of notmuch_database_close that you *don't* change to
notmuch_database_destroy.
Indeed, if the only change is to allow out-of-tree code access to the
new notmuch_database_close function then doing the patch series as
rename notmuch_database_close to notmuch_database_destroy
Then split notmuch_database_destroy make it clearer. (And if the code
compiles after step 1 then I know *all* occurrences of
notmuch_database_close have been changed to notmuch_database_destroy).
Best wishes
Mark
[1] Apart, of course, from notmuch_database_destroy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-17 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-21 0:55 [RFC] Split notmuch_database_close into two functions Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 1/7] " Justus Winter
2012-03-31 17:17 ` Mark Walters
2012-03-31 17:29 ` David Bremner
2012-04-16 21:51 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-17 8:37 ` Mark Walters [this message]
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 2/7] NEWS: Document the notmuch_database_close split Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 3/7] Use notmuch_database_destroy instead of notmuch_database_close Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 4/7] " Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 5/7] go: " Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 6/7] ruby: " Justus Winter
2012-03-21 0:55 ` [PATCH 7/7] python: wrap and use notmuch_database_destroy as destructor Justus Winter
2012-04-12 17:02 ` Austin Clements
2012-04-20 13:10 ` Sebastian Spaeth
2012-04-22 12:06 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 1/7] Split notmuch_database_close into two functions Justus Winter
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 2/7] NEWS: Document the notmuch_database_close split Justus Winter
2012-04-22 15:09 ` Felipe Contreras
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 3/7] Use notmuch_database_destroy instead of notmuch_database_close Justus Winter
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 4/7] " Justus Winter
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 5/7] go: " Justus Winter
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 6/7] ruby: " Justus Winter
2012-04-23 12:36 ` Felipe Contreras
2012-04-23 12:49 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-25 13:39 ` Austin Clements
2012-04-22 12:07 ` [PATCH 7/7] python: wrap and use notmuch_database_destroy as destructor Justus Winter
2012-04-22 18:01 ` [PATCH 1/7] Split notmuch_database_close into two functions Austin Clements
2012-04-25 13:20 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-25 13:34 ` Austin Clements
2012-04-28 12:54 ` David Bremner
2012-04-22 18:06 ` Austin Clements
2012-03-21 8:57 ` [RFC] " Patrick Totzke
2012-03-24 9:07 ` Tomi Ollila
2012-03-27 8:19 ` Justus Winter
2012-03-27 8:19 ` [PATCH 1/7] " Justus Winter
2012-04-01 3:23 ` [RFC] " Austin Clements
2012-04-12 9:05 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-12 16:57 ` Austin Clements
2012-04-12 17:19 ` Justus Winter
[not found] ` <20120413083358.13321.66680@megatron>
2012-04-16 21:45 ` Justus Winter
2012-04-17 4:56 ` Tomi Ollila
2012-04-17 8:42 ` Mark Walters
2012-04-18 17:54 ` Austin Clements
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://notmuchmail.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87pqb64uuf.fsf@qmul.ac.uk \
--to=markwalters1009@gmail.com \
--cc=4winter@informatik.uni-hamburg.de \
--cc=notmuch@notmuchmail.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://yhetil.org/notmuch.git/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).