RE: [Ksummit-discuss] [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology

[Bird, Tim]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Rostedt
> 
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 09:49:21 +0300
> Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.

 -- Tim