im.pidgin.pidgin: 796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

[markdoliner at pidgin.im]

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Revision: 796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b
Ancestor: ba2fcd0ff9b6309bdae42ab4c25a628916a5cb6c
Author: markdoliner at pidgin.im
Date: 2008-02-01T17:48:53
Branch: im.pidgin.pidgin
URL: http://d.pidgin.im/viewmtn/revision/info/796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

Modified files:
        libpurple/privacy.c
URL: http://d.pidgin.im/viewmtn/revision/info/796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

ChangeLog: 
URL: http://d.pidgin.im/viewmtn/revision/info/796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

Rename 'add_buddies_in_permit' to 'add_all_buddies_to_permit_list'
which I think more accurately describes the function, and add
comments to 'purple_privacy_allow' and 'purple_privacy_deny' saying
that I think the 'local' and 'restore' parameters could be removed.
URL: http://d.pidgin.im/viewmtn/revision/info/796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

Does anyone know what those parameters are intended to be used for?
URL: http://d.pidgin.im/viewmtn/revision/info/796a61ac575e44a9b6cc29a27df3d34ad52e627b

-------------- next part --------------
============================================================
--- libpurple/privacy.c	39b8c45a9c173b8a76da5fe4ea093cac217718e9
+++ libpurple/privacy.c	a843321bbd13669d76484ed3429f9fe83b7361ae
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ static void
  * buddy list and ONLY buddies from your buddy list.
  */
 static void
-add_buddies_in_permit(PurpleAccount *account, gboolean local)
+add_all_buddies_to_permit_list(PurpleAccount *account, gboolean local)
 {
 	GSList *list;
 
@@ -230,6 +230,12 @@ add_buddies_in_permit(PurpleAccount *acc
 	}
 }
 
+/*
+ * TODO: All callers of this function pass in FALSE for local and
+ *       restore and I don't understand when you would ever want to
+ *       use TRUE for either of them.  I think both parameters could
+ *       safely be removed in the next major version bump.
+ */
 void
 purple_privacy_allow(PurpleAccount *account, const char *who, gboolean local,
 						gboolean restore)
@@ -259,7 +265,7 @@ purple_privacy_allow(PurpleAccount *acco
 			break;
 		case PURPLE_PRIVACY_ALLOW_BUDDYLIST:
 			if (!purple_find_buddy(account, who)) {
-				add_buddies_in_permit(account, local);
+				add_all_buddies_to_permit_list(account, local);
 				purple_privacy_permit_add(account, who, local);
 				account->perm_deny = PURPLE_PRIVACY_ALLOW_USERS;
 			}
@@ -269,6 +275,12 @@ purple_privacy_allow(PurpleAccount *acco
 	}
 }
 
+/*
+ * TODO: All callers of this function pass in FALSE for local and
+ *       restore and I don't understand when you would ever want to
+ *       use TRUE for either of them.  I think both parameters could
+ *       safely be removed in the next major version bump.
+ */
 void
 purple_privacy_deny(PurpleAccount *account, const char *who, gboolean local,
 					gboolean restore)
@@ -298,7 +310,7 @@ purple_privacy_deny(PurpleAccount *accou
 			break;
 		case PURPLE_PRIVACY_ALLOW_BUDDYLIST:
 			if (purple_find_buddy(account, who)) {
-				add_buddies_in_permit(account, local);
+				add_all_buddies_to_permit_list(account, local);
 				purple_privacy_permit_remove(account, who, local);
 				account->perm_deny = PURPLE_PRIVACY_ALLOW_USERS;
 			}