Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > This is a patch series to address the discussion in the thread at: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20180713204350.GA16999@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Basically, the question was: can we declare strcpy banned and have a > linter save us the trouble of finding it in review. The answer is yes, > the compiler is good at that. ;) > > There are probably as many lists of banned functions as there are coding > style documents. I don't agree with every entry in the ones I've seen. > And in many cases coccinelle is a better choice, because the problem is > not "this function is so bad your patch should not even make it to the > list with it", but "don't do it like A; we prefer to do it like B > instead". And coccinelle does the latter more flexibly and > automatically. > > So I tried to pick some obvious and uncontroversial candidates here. > gets() could be another one, but it's mostly banned already (it's out of > the standard, and most libcs mark it with a deprecated attribute). > > Note that this needs to be applied on top of 022d2ac1f3 (blame: prefer > xsnprintf to strcpy for colors, 2018-07-13) or it will complain loudly. :) > > [1/2]: introduce "banned function" list > [2/2]: banned.h: mark strncpy as banned Hmph, there is no use of any banned function in hex.c, but when this topic is merged to 'pu', I seem to get this: $ make DEVELOPER=1 hex.o GIT_VERSION = 2.18.0.758.g18f90b35b8 CC hex.o In file included from git-compat-util.h:1250:0, from cache.h:4, from hex.c:1: banned.h:14:0: error: "strncpy" redefined [-Werror] #define strncpy(x,y,n) BANNED(strncpy) In file included from /usr/include/string.h:630:0, from git-compat-util.h:165, from cache.h:4, from hex.c:1: /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/string2.h:84:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition # define strncpy(dest, src, n) __builtin_strncpy (dest, src, n) cc1: all warnings being treated as errors Makefile:2279: recipe for target 'hex.o' failed make: *** [hex.o] Error 1
