From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 18:08:39 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/13] pack-revindex: prepare for incremental MIDX bitmaps
Message-ID: <20250326180839.GD2508080@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <Z9oK2XBF9plTBbnl@nand.local>

On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 08:07:53PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:

> > Right; some callers care about the number of objects in *their* layer,
> > like computing the size of some bitmap extensions, bounds-checking
> > pseudo-merge commit lookups, or generating positions for objects in the
> > extended index.
> >
> > I'm happy to include that discussion somewhere in the commit message or
> > as a comment nearby bitmap_non_extended_bits(), but I'm not sure which
> > is better. If you have thoughts, LMK.
> 
> I renamed this function to bitmap_num_objects_total(), which I think
> more clearly distinguishes it from bitmap_num_objects(). If you have
> other thoughts or things you think I should do in addition to that, LMK.

Yeah, that name is much more clear to me.

-Peff