On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 04:58:23PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> There are no callers of the "safe" version yet, but we'll add some in
> subsequent patches.
Makes sense.
> +int pair_chunk_unsafe(struct chunkfile *cf,
> + uint32_t chunk_id,
> + const unsigned char **p)
> {
> - return read_chunk(cf, chunk_id, pair_chunk_fn, p);
> + size_t dummy;
> + return pair_chunk(cf, chunk_id, p, &dummy);
I have always disliked functions that require you to pass a non-NULL
pointer to some value that you may or may not want to have that function
fill out. So I was going to suggest something along the lines of
"pair_chunk() should tolerate a NULL fourth argument instead of filling
out the size unconditionally".
But that's (a) the whole point of the series ;-), and (b) unnecessary,
since this function is going to go away entirely by the end of the
series, too.
So I think that the call you made here was the right one. The rest of
the patch all looks good to me, let's read on...
Thanks,
Taylor
