Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > The "argc" and "argv" names made sense when the struct was argv_array, > but now they're just confusing. Let's rename them to our usual "nr" and > "items" (which we use for string_list, as well as many ALLOC_GROW() > arrays). > > Note that we have to update all of the callers immediately. Playing > tricks with the preprocessor is hard here, because we wouldn't want to > rewrite unrelated tokens. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> > --- > I'm actually not that fond of "items". I almost went with just: > > const char **v; > > as the variable name which contains it usually provides sufficient > context. But I worried that people would consider that too inscrutable. I'd agree that v[] is a good name. If it is too short, I can live with item[], but not with items[]. Clearly we are mostly accessing one element at a time much more often than treating the set as a whole, so signaling "there are multiple things in the set" with a plural name is much less important than being able to say item[4] to name the 4th item in the collection.
