On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 07:49:51PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > ... So once we've "reverted back", 1) the pointer is null; and, 2)
> > > the callback function doesn't access it for the previous/reverted
> > > phase anyway.
>
> BTW I'm pretty sure this "revert back" phrasing is not good English --
> you should just use "revert". Maybe get some native speaker's opinion
> on it.
I'm a native speaker; "revert back" might be called redundant but I think it's
common usage.
> And speaking of language, I find the particle "cbarg" rather very ugly,
> and it's *everywhere* -- function name, function argument, local
> variable, enum values, enum name. It even spread to the typedefs.list
> file! Is this a new virus??? Put some soap in it! Can't we use "info"
> or "state" or something similar, less infectious, instead?
I renamed it since it was kind of opaque looking. It's in all the same places,
so equally infectious; but I hope you like it better.
Cheers,
--
Justin
