The "is" is to match "isancestor" and to make it clear that it doesn't
return a descendant. The "rev" is to make it clear that it's not about
nodeids (unlike e.g. isancestor()). The argument order change is just
seems more natural (and makes isancestor() less confusing).
Details
Details
- Reviewers
indygreg - Group Reviewers
hg-reviewers - Commits
- rHG160da69ba1bf: revlog: replace descendant(b, a) by isdescendantrev(a, b) (API)
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rHG Mercurial
- Lint
Lint Skipped - Unit
Unit Tests Skipped
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
This doesn't feels simpler, would it be possible to simply rename descendant into isancestorrev without changing the order of the arguments?
Also it would be useful for extensions to have a deprecation warning at least for 1 cycle?
Comment Actions
This doesn't feels simpler, would it be possible to simply rename `descendant` into `isancestorrev` without changing the order of the arguments?
While I've queued this without reading any comments (I hate junk mails
from Phabricator), I second the removal/deprecation of isdescendant*()
in favor of isancestor*().
Comment Actions
That's fine with me. Kind of ironic since someone very recently went in the opposite direction and wrote isancestor() in terms of descendant() :) I'll send a patch.