> The rename the "n" variable added in c553c72eed6 (run-command: add an
> asynchronous parallel child processor, 2015-12-15) to "jobs", and
> change the type to an "unsigned int". As we'll see in a subsequent
> commit we do pass "0" here, but never "jobs < 0".
> - pp->max_processes = n;
> + pp->max_processes = jobs;
>
> - trace_printf("run_processes_parallel: preparing to run up to %d tasks", n);
> + trace_printf("run_processes_parallel: preparing to run up to %d tasks",
> + jobs);
Should we normalize what we call processes/jobs/tasks? They all
seem to mean the same thing. I'm leaning towards processes
since the function name itself is run_processes_parallel.
> - * Runs up to n processes at the same time. Whenever a process can be
> + * Runs up to 'jobs' processes at the same time. Whenever a process can be
Also should "jobs" be changed to "max_jobs" or whatever normalized name
we call it? The comment here can then be changed to:
"Runs up to 'max_processes' at the same time."
