Hi,
On Sun, 9 Aug 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> This style is overkill for some commands, but it's worthwhile to use
> the same style to issue all commands, and it's useful to avoid
> open-coding string lengths.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Thanks. I am positively surprised that you did this patch in spite of the
basis already being in 'next'.
> + strbuf_addstr(&buf, "capabilities\n");
> + write_in_full(helper->in, buf.buf, buf.len);
> + strbuf_reset(&buf);
Hmm. I think you use the same paradigm three times. Maybe it is time to
heed the DRY principle and introduce a helper function?
Maybe something like
void fprintf_in_full(struct strbuf *buf, int fd, const char *format, ...)
{
va_list ap;
va_start(ap, format);
strbuf_reset(buf);
strbuf_vaddf(buf, format, ap);
write_in_full(fd, buf->buf, buf->len);
va_end(ap);
}
But I keep forgetting that there is no strbuf_vaddf() in 'next'... maybe
it is high time that I forget my promise and re-submit that series?
Ciao,
Dscho
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html