Hi Hannes, On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 04.02.19 um 11:38 schrieb Johannes Schindelin: > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > > >> Am 03.02.19 um 17:51 schrieb Johannes Sixt: > >>> strbuf_vinsertf inserts a formatted string in the middle of an existing > >>> strbuf value. > >> > >> Quite frankly, this is a really unusual operation, and I'd prefer to get > >> rid of it. There is only one call, and it looks like it only wants to be > >> lazy and save one strbuf variable. > > > > The only reason why there are not more callers is that I did not convert > > any of the appropriate places. We have quite a few places where we > > allocate a new strbuf for the sole purpose of formatting something that is > > then inserted into an already existing strbuf (possibly extending the > > buffer, which might require a move of the buffer just because that > > temporary strbuf is in the way). > > > > It does not sound like good practice to me to allocate things left and > > right, only to reallocate something that was just allocated anyway and to > > copy things into that and then release things left and right. > > I prefer separation of concerns at the expense of a bit of resource > consumption that is not measurable. But that is the only argument that I > have. As far as I am concerned, the `strbuf_vinsertf()` function does not conflate any concerns... It has one, very easily explained concern: to interpolate text into the middle of a `strbuf`, much like `strbuf_vaddf()` interpolates text at the end of one... You found a bug in the implementation of that concern, is all, and fixed it, for which I am grateful. Ciao, Dscho
