On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, Christopher Michael wrote:

> On 12/23/2009 06:14 PM, Christopher Michael wrote:
>> On 12/23/2009 06:01 PM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
>>>
>>>> Log:
>>>>    When using snprintf or fgets, etc, do not use PATH_MAX directly as the 
>>>> size
>>>>    of the variable...use sizeof() compiler directive (lots of these).
>>>
>>> that's something i don't understand.
>>>
>>> char buf[PATH_MAX] is an array of size PATH_MAX in bytes
>>> and sizeof(buf) returns the size of buf in bytes, which is also PATH_MAX
>>>
>>> so what is the interest of using sizeof() instead of PATH_MAX ?
>>>
>>> Vincent
>>
>> A little while ago I had changed snprintf's in several spots todo just
>> that...PATH_MAX rather than sizeof()...raster suggested against it and
>> had a valid reason (can't remember it now, but if you grep the mailing
>> list archives I am sure you will find the discussion)
>>
>> dh
>>
> Also, doing sizeof() is a compiler directive so does not incur any
> performance hits...plus it matches the rest of EFL.

using a macro does not involved any performance hit too as PATH_MAX is 
directly replaced by its value before the compilation.

Vincent

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to