On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> +     strbuf_setlen(sb, len);
>> +     strbuf_add(sb, s, strlen(s));
> I am not sure addstr_at() gives us a good abstraction, or at least
> the name conveys what it does well not to confuse readers.
> At first after only seeing its name, I would have expected that it
> would splice the given string into an existing strbuf at the
> location, not chopping the existing strbuf at the location and
> appending.

I think I invented a few new strbuf_* in this series and this is one
of them. We have about ~14 other places in current code that do
similar pattern: set length back, then add something on top. Not sure
if it's worth a convenient wrapper. I don't know, maybe it's not worth
reducing one line and causing more confusion.

>> +}
>>  static inline void strbuf_addbuf(struct strbuf *sb, const struct strbuf 
>> *sb2) {
>>       strbuf_grow(sb, sb2->len);
>>       strbuf_add(sb, sb2->buf, sb2->len);

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to