Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>> Using "str" would be consistent with oid_array where the individual
>> component is called "oid" as it is defined this way:
>>
>> struct oid_array {
>> struct object_id *oid;
>> size_t nr;
>> size_t alloc;
>> int sorted;
>> };
>
> Yeah, I agree "str" is a reasonable name, and probably better than
> "elem" or "items". I do still like the super-concise "v" better, though.
One problem with names like "str", "string", and "oid" is that it
leads to this stupid pattern:
struct oid_array *oid;
oid_to_hex(oid->oid[0], ...);
We know the thing is object name by the pointer variable having the
name oid already---there is no need to repeat we are talking about
oid again with the field name.
So, "str" being consistent with "oid_array" is not necessarily a
plus.
Ultra-concise v[] that stands for value, or e[] that stands for
element, do not share this problem.
One plus about the redundant field name is that it is easier to run
grep -E -e "([.]|->)oid"
but I do not know how important that is.
