On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 5:07 AM Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 06:19:27PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 9:22 AM Kent Overstreet > > <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 08:33:57AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > Actually instead of producing zillions of variants, do a %p extension > > > > to the printf() and that's it. We have, for example, %pt with T and > > > > with space to follow users that want one or the other variant. Same > > > > can be done with string_get_size(). > > > > > > God no. > > > > Any elaboration what's wrong with that? > > I'm really not a fan of %p extensions in general (they are what people > reach for because we can't standardize on a common string output API), The whole story behind, for example, %pt is to _standardize_ the output of the same stanza in the kernel. > but when we'd be passing it bare integers the lack of type safety would > be a particularly big footgun. There is no difference to any other place in the kernel where we can shoot into our foot. > > God no for zillion APIs for almost the same. Today you want space, > > tomorrow some other (special) delimiter. > > No, I just want to delete the space and output numbers the same way > everyone else does. And if we are stuck with two string_get_size() > functions, %p extensions in no way improve the situation. I think it's exactly for the opposite, i.e. standardize that output once and for all. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
