On 7/7/20 8:24 AM, Bird, Tim wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Steven Rostedt >> >> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 09:49:21 +0300 >> Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: >> >>>> But that's all fine. The change is easy to do and is more descriptive >>>> even if I can't find terms that don't collide with my internal grammar >>>> checker. ;) >>> >>> How about yeslist and nolist? ;-) >> >> I was thinking good-list / bad-list. >> >> /me that has been doing a lot of git bisect lately... > > I think it depends on the context. I'd prefer a grammatically awkward verb > that described > the action more specifically, than a grammatically nicer generic term. In > other words, > yes/no, good/bad don't mean that much to me, unless it's obvious from context > what the effect will be. With something like allow/deny, I have a pretty > clear mental > model of what the code is going to do.
That matches what I was about to say: Just using yes/no does not tell someone what they are saying yes or no about. It should be more descriptive, like allow/block. -- ~Randy
