Re: [PATCH 0/6] minor test-hashmap fixes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This series started with me fixing the sizeof() mismatch discussed in
>
>   https://public-inbox.org/git/20180214164628.GA907@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> but I found a number of minor irritations. Most of them are cosmetic in
> practice, but I think it's important for test-helper code like this to
> model best practices, since people are likely to use it as a reference.
>
>   [1/6]: test-hashmap: use ALLOC_ARRAY rather than bare malloc
>   [2/6]: test-hashmap: check allocation computation for overflow
>   [3/6]: test-hashmap: use xsnprintf rather than snprintf
>   [4/6]: test-hashmap: use strbuf_getline rather than fgets
>   [5/6]: test-hashmap: simplify alloc_test_entry
>   [6/6]: test-hashmap: use "unsigned int" for hash storage
>

The whole series is
Reviewed-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks for improving the example code.
I have lost track of the hashmap improvements lately, but with
such a good test helper, we could reduce the amount of
commented code in hashmap.h and just link to the test helper?
(as an extra step after this series, I thought we already had that)

Thanks,
Stefan



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux