Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> @@ -1135,11 +1135,11 @@ static int pp_collect_finished(struct parallel_processes *pp)
> strbuf_addbuf(&pp->buffered_output, &pp->children[i].err);
> strbuf_reset(&pp->children[i].err);
> } else {
> - fputs(pp->children[i].err.buf, stderr);
> + strbuf_write(&pp->children[i].err, stderr);
> strbuf_reset(&pp->children[i].err);
>
> /* Output all other finished child processes */
> - fputs(pp->buffered_output.buf, stderr);
> + strbuf_write(&pp->buffered_output, stderr);
> strbuf_reset(&pp->buffered_output);
>
> /*
> diff --git a/strbuf.c b/strbuf.c
> index 38686ff..71345cd 100644
> --- a/strbuf.c
> +++ b/strbuf.c
> @@ -395,6 +395,12 @@ ssize_t strbuf_read_once(struct strbuf *sb, int fd, size_t hint)
> return cnt;
> }
>
> +ssize_t strbuf_write(struct strbuf *sb, FILE *f)
> +{
> + return fwrite(sb->buf, 1, sb->len, f);
> +}
Whenever I see a call to a function that takes size and nmemb
separately, I get worried about the case where nmemb is zero.
Hopefully everybody implements such a fwrite() as a no-op?
This may not matter in this patch as no caller checks the return
value from this function, but shouldn't the callers be a bit more
careful checking errors in the first place?
--
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