| Message ID | 20210506081936.29887-1-dyroneteng@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Fix a small flaw in the comment of strmap.h | expand |
Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> writes: > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a small flaw in the comment of strmap.h cf. Documentation/SubmittingPatches::summary-section > Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> > --- > strmap.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/strmap.h b/strmap.h > index 1e152d832d..0d1d00d14e 100644 > --- a/strmap.h > +++ b/strmap.h > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct strmap_entry *strmap_get_entry(struct strmap *map, const char *str); > void *strmap_get(struct strmap *map, const char *str); > > /* > - * Return non-zero iff "str" is present in the map. This differs from > + * Return non-zero if "str" is present in the map. This differs from The original is correct; this function returns a non-zero value if and only if (iff is a common abbreviation for this expression) "str" is in the map, implying that when "str" is not in the map, the caller can rest assured that the function will not return a non-zero value (in other words, the caller is guaranteed to receive zero). If you change that to "if", the comment no longer says what happens when "str" is *not* present in the map, which is making it worse.
>The original is correct; this function returns a non-zero value if >and only if (iff is a common abbreviation for this expression) "str" >is in the map, implying that when "str" is not in the map, the >caller can rest assured that the function will not return a non-zero >value (in other words, the caller is guaranteed to receive zero). >If you change that to "if", the comment no longer says what happens >when "str" is *not* present in the map, which is making it worse. Thanks, got it. Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 于2021年5月6日周四 下午4:46写道： > > Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> writes: > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a small flaw in the comment of strmap.h > > cf. Documentation/SubmittingPatches::summary-section > > > Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> > > --- > > strmap.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/strmap.h b/strmap.h > > index 1e152d832d..0d1d00d14e 100644 > > --- a/strmap.h > > +++ b/strmap.h > > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct strmap_entry *strmap_get_entry(struct strmap *map, const char *str); > > void *strmap_get(struct strmap *map, const char *str); > > > > /* > > - * Return non-zero iff "str" is present in the map. This differs from > > + * Return non-zero if "str" is present in the map. This differs from > > The original is correct; this function returns a non-zero value if > and only if (iff is a common abbreviation for this expression) "str" > is in the map, implying that when "str" is not in the map, the > caller can rest assured that the function will not return a non-zero > value (in other words, the caller is guaranteed to receive zero). > > If you change that to "if", the comment no longer says what happens > when "str" is *not* present in the map, which is making it worse.
diff --git a/strmap.h b/strmap.h index 1e152d832d..0d1d00d14e 100644 --- a/strmap.h +++ b/strmap.h @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct strmap_entry *strmap_get_entry(struct strmap *map, const char *str); void *strmap_get(struct strmap *map, const char *str); /* - * Return non-zero iff "str" is present in the map. This differs from + * Return non-zero if "str" is present in the map. This differs from * strmap_get() in that it can distinguish entries with a NULL data pointer. */ int strmap_contains(struct strmap *map, const char *str);
Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com> --- strmap.h | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)