Jeff King writes:
>> (although the calloc() case is slightly different from mallocz()),
>> see: https://public-inbox.org/git/871shum182@evledraar.gmail.com/
>
> Hmm. I do think xmallocz is a bit more explicit instruction of "please
> NUL-terminate this for me" than xcalloc is. So I don't thin
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 01:55:02PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:27 PM, wrote:
> > Since 3733e69464 (use xmallocz to avoid size arithmetic, 2016-02-22) we
> > allocate the buffer for the lower case string with xmallocz(). This
> > already ensures a NUL at the
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:27 PM, wrote:
> Since 3733e69464 (use xmallocz to avoid size arithmetic, 2016-02-22) we
> allocate the buffer for the lower case string with xmallocz(). This
> already ensures a NUL at the end of the allocated buffer.
>
> Remove the unnecessary assignment.
> [...]
>
From: Lars Schneider
Since 3733e69464 (use xmallocz to avoid size arithmetic, 2016-02-22) we
allocate the buffer for the lower case string with xmallocz(). This
already ensures a NUL at the end of the allocated buffer.
Remove the unnecessary assignment.
Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider
---
strbu
4 matches
Mail list logo
