Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> ... did you have any comment on >> the "struct config_key" alternative I sent as a follow-up? > > I did read it but I cannot say I did so very carefully. My gut > reaction was that the "take the variable name and section name, > return the subsection name pointer and length, if there is any, and > the key" made it readable enough. The proposed interface to make > and lend a copy to the caller does make it more readble, but I do > not know if that is worth doing. Neutral-to-slightly-in-favor, I > would say. Now I re-read that "struct config_key" thing, I would have to say that the idea of giving split and NUL-terminated strings to the callers is good, but the "cheat" looks somewhat brittle for all the reasons that come from using a static buffer (which you already mentioned). As I do not offhand think of a better alternative, I'd say we leave it for another day. -- 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