Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > The current count-up isn't a big deal, as we need to preprocess that > array anyway. But it will become more cumbersome as we refactor the > shortening code. So let's get rid of it and just use the constant > everywhere. OK. As the array is constant, we could lose its NULL-termination and -1 from the definition of NUM_REV_PARSE_RULES, but that has iffy upside, and can come on top of the series if we really wanted to. Looking good so far. Thanks.
