> +/* > + * Can be used as a no-op hunk_fn for xdi_diff_outf(), since a NULL > + * one just sends the hunk line to the line_fn callback). > + */ > +void discard_hunk_line(void *, long, long, long, long, const char *, long); Recently we had the discussion on style and naming things. On the one hand I don't know what these 4 different longs do, so I'd wish for some descriptive variable names in here. On the other hand the docs explain clearly why I don't need to care (a no-op ignores all of the parameters, no need to take care of their order) So to revive that discussion, I would strongly prefer to have *some* names there, for the sake of a simply described coding style without many exceptions (especially those exceptions that rely on judgement). Today I read [1], which describes the analog in the mechanical world: To evolve and have more impact you need tighter requirements on some parts. And I would roughly translate that to our use case as not having to worry about style (it's ironic I even type out this email... if we could just run clang format or some other tightly controlling formatter/linter, I'd be much happier as our focus should be elsewhere, such as UX or performance). Apart from that, I read the whole series, and found it a pleasant read. Thanks, Stefan [1] https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2018/10/25/precision-accuracy-perfectionism/
