René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Pierre Habouzit schrieb: >> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 06:16:01PM +0000, Linus Torvalds wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 23 Dec 2008, Pierre Habouzit wrote: >>>> when readlink fails, the strbuf shall not be destroyed. It's not how >>>> read_file_or_gitlink works for example. >>> I disagree. >>> >>> This patch just makes things worse. Just leave the "strbuf_release()" in >>> _one_ place. > ... > The "append or do nothing" rule is broken by strbuf_getline(), but I agree > to your reasoning. How about refining this rule a bit to "do your thing > and roll back changes if an error occurs"? I think it's not worth to undo > allocation extensions, but making reverting first time allocations seems > like a good idea. Something like this? I think this is much better than Pierre's. Pierre's "if it is called strbuf_*, it should always append" is a good uniformity to have in an API, but making the caller suffer for clean-up is going backwards. The reason we use strbuf when we can is so that the callers do not have to worry about memory allocation issues too much. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
