Lucas Oshiro <lucasseikioshiro@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > +/* > + * Returns the tag body of the given oid or NULL, in case of error. If size is > + * not NULL it is assigned the body size in bytes (excluding the '\0'). > + */ > +static char *get_tag_body(const struct object_id *oid, size_t *size) > { > + unsigned long buf_size; > enum object_type type; > + char *buf, *sp, *tag_body; > + size_t tag_body_size, signature_offset; > > + buf = read_object_file(oid, &type, &buf_size); > if (!buf) > + return NULL; > /* skip header */ > sp = strstr(buf, "\n\n"); > > + if (!sp || !buf_size || type != OBJ_TAG) { > free(buf); > + return NULL; > } Returning early when !buf_size before even attempting to strstr would be cleaner to read, i.e. buf = read_object_file(...); if (!buf || !buf_size) { free(buf); return NULL; } body = strstr(buf, "\n\n"); FWIW, the type check that is done after this point could also be a part of the early return, as there is no point scanning for the end of object header part if the object is not a tag (e.g. if it were a blob, there is no "header part" and scanning for a blank line is meaningless). > sp += 2; /* skip the 2 LFs */ > + signature_offset = parse_signature(sp, buf + buf_size - sp); > + sp[signature_offset] = '\0'; > > + /* detach sp from buf */ > + tag_body_size = strlen(sp) + 1; > + tag_body = xmalloc(tag_body_size); > + xsnprintf(tag_body, tag_body_size, "%s", sp); Isn't this essentially tag_body = xstrdup(sp); tag_body_size = signature_offset; (my arith may be off by one or two, but does a separate tag_body_size need to exist?) > free(buf); > + if (size) > + *size = tag_body_size - 1; /* exclude '\0' */ > + return tag_body; > +} > + > +static void write_tag_body(int fd, const struct object_id *oid) > +{ > + size_t size; > + const char *tag_body = get_tag_body(oid, &size); > + > + if (!tag_body) { > + warning("failed to get tag body for %s", oid->hash); I do not think the original gives any such warning. - Do we want to be unconditionally noisy this way? - Should this be a fatal error? If not, why? - Should the message be translatable? As an interface, is it sensible to force any and all callers of get_tag_body() to supply a pointer to &size? Is the returned value always a NUL-terminated string? I suspect that people would find it a more natural interface if its were like: const char *body = get_tag_body(oid); if (!body) ...; if (this caller needs size) { size_t body_size = strlen(body); ... use both body and body_size ... write_or_die(fd, body, body_size); } else { ... just use body ... printf("%s", body); } > + return; > + } > + printf("tag_body: <%s>\n", tag_body); > + write_or_die(fd, tag_body, size); WTH is this double writing? > } > > static int build_tag_object(struct strbuf *buf, int sign, struct object_id *result)