On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 1:05 PM Calvin Wan <calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > strbuf, as a generic and widely used structure across the codebase, > should be limited as a libary to only interact with primitives. Add s/libary/library/ > documentation so future functions can be appropriately be placed. Older Too many "be"'s. > functions that do not follow this boundary should eventually be moved or > refactored. > > Signed-off-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > diff --git a/strbuf.h b/strbuf.h > @@ -5,7 +5,11 @@ struct string_list; > /** > * strbuf's are meant to be used with all the usual C string and memory > - * APIs. Given that the length of the buffer is known, it's often better to > + * APIs. The objects that this API interacts with in this file should be > + * limited to other primitives, however, there are older functions in here > + * that should eventually be moved out or refactored. > + * > + * Given that the length of the buffer is known, it's often better to > * use the mem* functions than a str* one (memchr vs. strchr e.g.). > * Though, one has to be careful about the fact that str* functions often > * stop on NULs and that strbufs may have embedded NULs. The new text is administrative in nature, aimed at people who will be modifying strbuf itself. As such, it is unclear why it is being inserted into documentation aimed at _consumers_ of the strbuf API. Moreover, with it buried in existing API documentation like this, I fear that those at whom it is aimed will almost certainly overlook it. To increase the likelihood that the target audience will indeed read the new text, I'd suggest placing it in its own comment block very near the top of the file, possibly prefixed with a loud "NOTE FOR STRBUF DEVELOPERS" or some such. Further, as the new text is aimed at strbuf developers, not strbuf consumers, it would make more sense to use a plain /*...*/ comment block rather than a /**...*/ block.
