> Since this lacks <area>: prefix, "git shortlog" readers will have a > hard time guessing which show_object() function this commit is > about. Sorry for the late reply. Agree, it will be fixed in next patch. > But it does not quite explain why we need another parameter to do > so, which involves changing the function signature of many > functions, instead of making show_data to point at a new structure > type that holds the original data show_data used to carry plus > another single void * member (or the set of members you'd be > carrying into these functions using this new parameter). > > I also find "carry_data" a meaningless name for the parameter. All > in-parameters into functions are used to carry some data into it > after all. The existing "show_data" at least makes a bit more > sense; it contains data necessary for showing the object in these > code paths. If the purpose this new thing was introduced is to > cache ownership relationship data, perhaps ownership_cache would be > a more descriptive and understandable name (be it a new parameter to > added to many functions, or a member to the new structure that > replaces show_data). Agree. I think "show_data to point at a new structure" is a better idea. I will follow the idea and optimize the related code. By the way, the naming about "ownership_cache" will be introduced in the next patch too, unless I can find a better one t(-_-t). Thanks.
