Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Wow, they have truly taken "unbuffered" to a whole new level. > > I don't mind seeing this for all platforms, though. I can't think of any > downside, and having one less moving part to contend with in our > error-reporting code seems like a good thing. FWIW, it was my mistake to sound as if I was unhappy to see this done on all platforms. As long as the end result is to reasonably buffer, I do not mind us (as opposed to the system library we sometimes cannot trust) being the one who implements the buffering. I very much prefer to see the same code run everywhere than #ifdef in this case. > I'd recommend xsnprintf() here. If we have a prefix longer than our > vreportf() buffer, I think a BUG() is the right outcome. > ... > I'd disagree here. Any caller sending an arbitrarily-large prefix is > holding it wrong, and we'd probably want to know as soon as possible > (and a BUG() is our best bet there). Yes. We are not using an unvetted input as the prefix here, if somebody needs to use a larger prefix somewhere, that patch needs to argue the pros-and-cons between making the buffer larger or shortening that larger prefix.
