On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 05:17:57PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 21 2021, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 02:45:16PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > > >> I think that generally git's codebase could use going beyond just > >> "const char *" when a "const char * const" would suffice, for some > >> reason we seem to mostly use it for the static usage variables. > > > > I didn't dig up the references in the list archive, but I feel like > > we've had this discussion long ago. One of the reasons not to do so is > > that it pollutes the function's interface with internal details.[...] > > Are there cases in my conversion where the caller has to do anything > special that they didn't before? These are also all static functions, so > it's all internal details exported to nobody. No, they don't have to do anything differently. I just meant that it clutters the interface when a human is reading it. -Peff
