On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I don't mind silencing this one warning (even though I find it a little >> ridiculous). I'm slightly concerned that more brain-damage may be coming >> our way, but we can deal with that if it ever does. >> >> Like Junio, I prefer keeping strlen() rather than switching to sizeof, >> as it is less error-prone (no need for extra "-1" dance, and it won't >> silently do the wrong thing if the array is ever converted to a >> pointer). > > I actually do not mind losing the sample[] array too much. > > The early 45 bytes or so of that array (or a string constant) is not used > by the code at all; I didn't want to count "From " (that's 5), 40-hex and > then a SP -- ah, see, it is 46 bytes and I didn't want such miscounting. > The only real contents that matter in that sample[] array is the tail part > that is meant as the magic(5) cue. I'd be OK if the code checked the > length of the line against a hardcoded constant and then did strcmp() > starting from a hardcoded offset of the string and the magic cue string, > and that would also avoid the warning from Eric's compiler. The -Wstring-plus-int option is "smart" enough to suppress the warning if the hardcoded offset falls within the bounds of the string literal, so this could work (but it feels a bit fragile compared to the current code). > But personally, I think the way it is coded is much easier to read, > and is much harder to get it wrong while maintaining it. So... -- 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