On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:06:41AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 09:30:38PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> >
> >> The implementation of strbuf_list_free() is this:
> >>
> >> struct strbuf **s = sbs;
> >> while (*s) {
> >> strbuf_release(*s);
> >> free(*s++);
> >> }
> >> free(sbs);
> >>
> >> which means that wt-status.c is leaking not only 'split', but also
> >> each element of split[], right?
> >
> > Yeah, I didn't notice that, but I think you're right.
>
> Correct.
>
> I suspect that we would be better off in the longer term if
> we made conscious effort to deprecate and eradicate the use
> of strbuf_split* API functions. They are easy to write
> crappy code with, inefficient, and error prone. You would
> rarely need to have N resulting pieces as strbufs to be
> easily manipulatable [*1*].
Yeah, I agree that it is a clunky interface, and I would be happy to see
it go away. Many callers would be better off with string_list_split().
When I've looked in the past, though, converting some of the callers was
somewhat non-trivial.
But in this case...
> The function can be written by not using the "split and then
> rebuild" pattern, perhaps like so, and the result is even
> easier to read and understand, I would say. A sample rewrite
> is attached at the end.
I agree that the function is much simpler without it.
> + /* find the second token on the line */
> + cp = strchr(line->buf, ' ');
> + if (!cp)
> + return;
> + cp++;
> + ep = strchr(cp, ' ');
> + if (!ep)
> + return;
Would we ever see "cmd sha1" without a third token? If so, we'd want:
ep = strchrnul(cp, ' ');
-Peff
--
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