Re: hash, xhash: modernize

[Jim Meyering]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 7:32 PM Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org> wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> > > I tried to make it clear the last time we discussed this (long ago!)
> > > that I prefer to keep certain comments very near the function
> > > definition (and implementation).
>
> Yes, I sort of remembered this. Therefore I asked for objections, and put
> you in CC.
>
> > > I disagree with the premise that hash_delete should be renamed. That's
> > > an API-breaking change.
>
> Yes, it's an API change. I applied the usual procedure for API changes in
> gnulib: add the new API, then wait for more than a year, before the old API
> can be removed.
>
> > That said, I will not object to your normalizing diffs.
>
> I'm confused now. Which of the three patches, or which parts of them,
> do you wish to see reverted?

Thanks, but I can live with the status quo. No revert needed.