Re: sizeof(var) vs sizeof(type), was Re: [PATCH] git: use COPY_ARRAY and MOVE_ARRAY in handle_alias()

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

 



On 9/26/2019 11:24 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> On 26/09/2019 14:36, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>>>> Another good reason to use "sizeof(var)" instead of sizeof(type)". :)
>>> That is indeed a very good reason, in addition to getting the type right
>>> automatically (by virtue of letting the compiler pick it).
>>>
>>> Should we make this an explicit guideline in our documentation?
>> Better yet: can we create a Coccinelle script to fix it automatically?
>>
>> -Stolee
>>
> How about 'Both'. We can't assume all contributors have Coccinelle on their OS/system.

Both is best, but I find static checkers to be more reliable than
updating documentation. For that reason, I would prioritize the
Coccinelle script over adding another bullet point to the style
guide.

The PR builds for GitGitGadget run ci/run-static-analysis.sh as a check
(see the StaticAnalysis job in [1] for an example). That provides a free
way to get feedback for users without Coccinelle.

[1] https://dev.azure.com/gitgitgadget/git/_build/results?buildId=16864&view=logs

Thanks,
-Stolee



[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