Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I actually do not mind the rule to be more like > > * Use the same parameter names used in the function declaration when > the description in the API documentation refers the parameter. Assuming that we adopt the above guideline, let's extending it to the original patch's review. The following is a good example. FIRST and SECOND would have been upcased if this followed my earlier illustration to make them stand out as references to the parameters, but it is already readable without upcasing _and_ naming parameters is helping here. /** * Compare two buffers. Returns an integer less than, equal to, or greater * than zero if the first buffer is found, respectively, to be less than, * to match, or be greater than the second buffer. */ -extern int strbuf_cmp(const struct strbuf *, const struct strbuf *); +int strbuf_cmp(const struct strbuf *first, const struct strbuf *second); The next one could be improved and say something like: "Remove LEN bytes in the strbuf SB starting at offset POS", as it already had 'pos' and 'len' that are readily usable. Notice that "Remove LEN bytes starting at offset POS" is a sufficiently clear description and that is why I do not think we should require all parameters to be named. /** * Remove given amount of data from a given position of the buffer. */ -extern void strbuf_remove(struct strbuf *, size_t pos, size_t len); +void strbuf_remove(struct strbuf *sb, size_t pos, size_t len); The last example is a job half-done. The original had pos and len parameters and referred to them in the text, but just said "with the given data". Now we have data and data_len, "the given data" can and should be clarified by referring to them. /** * Remove the bytes between `pos..pos+len` and replace it with the given * data. */ -extern void strbuf_splice(struct strbuf *, size_t pos, size_t len, - const void *, size_t); +void strbuf_splice(struct strbuf *sb, size_t pos, size_t len, + const void *data, size_t data_len);
