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
