Re: [PATCH 04/17] Name local variables more consistently

On 08/23/2012 10:39 AM, Jeff King wrote:

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:10:29AM +0200, mhagger@alum.mit.edu wrote:

quoted

From: Michael Haggerty <redacted>

Use the names (nr_heads, heads) consistently across functions, instead
of sometimes naming the same values (nr_match, match).

I think this is fine, although:

quoted

--- a/builtin/fetch-pack.c
+++ b/builtin/fetch-pack.c

@@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ static void mark_recent_complete_commits(unsigned long cutoff)
 	}
 }
 
-static void filter_refs(struct ref **refs, int nr_match, char **match)
+static void filter_refs(struct ref **refs, int nr_heads, char **heads)
 {
 	struct ref **return_refs;
 	struct ref *newlist = NULL;

@@ -530,12 +530,12 @@ static void filter_refs(struct ref **refs, int nr_match, char **match)
 	struct ref *fastarray[32];
 	int match_pos;

This match_pos is an index into the "match" array, which becomes "head".
Should it become head_pos?

And then bits like this:

quoted

-			while (match_pos < nr_match) {
-				cmp = strcmp(ref->name, match[match_pos]);
+			while (match_pos < nr_heads) {
+				cmp = strcmp(ref->name, heads[match_pos]);

Would be:

  while (head_pos < nr_heads)

which makes more sense to me.

I was up in the air about this, because match_pos *is* the position at
which a match is attempted.  But since the name also strikes you as
wrong, I will change it in the next version.

Thanks for this and all of your other comments!

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/