GenServer: Rename continue argument in handle_continue/2

[eksperimental]

As I was reading the docs, it was not clear what the continue argument
was just by reading its name.

handle_call and handle_cast use request for a similar argument,
so I unified it.

[anildigital]

Looks fine to me

[whatyouhide]

If we're going back to revisit this, I would make the case that request doesn't represent what's going on here. The GenServer is not making a "request" to itself. It's passing a term to be used in the continuation. I think these words might convey the meaning better:

• context — we're passing the "context" necessary to continue
• continue_term — not the prettiest, but conveys the meaning 😄

Thoughts?

[josevalim]

Let’s call it continue_arg then?

[whatyouhide]

@josevalim yes that's great for me too. continue_arg it is!

[eksperimental]

The other expression that was used before this PR was instruction.

[eksperimental]

So the possible names that I see are instruction, continue_instruction or continue_arg.

I'm in favor of continue_instruction, as I think it is more descriptive than continue_arg.

[josevalim]

Id go with continue_arg or continue_argument.

[whatyouhide]

Let's go with continue_arg @eksperimental, thanks! 💟

[eksperimental]

I'm in doubt whether we can use the same variable for two continue_arg values that could be different.

[josevalim]

We cannot but in this case they are the same. We can only return a continue_arg that handle_continue accepts.

[eksperimental]

The PR is ready for reviewing.

[josevalim]

💚 💙 💜 💛 ❤️