On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 06:54:51AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > I don't feel very strongly about it, but I had suggested it because my > > initial read of this patch confused me, and I had wondered if others may > > be similarly confused. > > > > For what it's worth, I was thinking something on the order of the > > following added to the patch message: > > > > Note that the reftable_buf_add() function intentionally takes a "const > > void *" instead of a "const char *" (as does its strbuf counterpart, > > strbuf_add()) to emphasize that the buffer may contain NUL characters. > > > > But, as I said, I don't feel very strongly about it. > > You know: let me amend the function documentation itself. That feels way > less out of place compared to putting this info into the commit message > and has the benefit that a future reader of the code will know why we > have types without digging into the commit history. Good idea, thanks. Thanks, Taylor
