Re: [PATCH] array_length, array_end macros for internal use

[Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>]

Florian Weimer wrote:

> I didn't want to use array_size because of the potential confusion with sizeof.

Yes, that's a good reason to avoid that name.

> glibc has not followed this style for some time (see libc_hidden_def, 
> __libc_lock_lock etc.), and the C++ version (if we need it) will be written as a 
> function anyway.

OK, then how about the "arrayelts", or "array_elts"? "array_length" is a bit 
confusion-prone, because "length" is so often one less than the number of elements.