2017-01-15 3:42 GMT+01:00 Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>: > Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Ok. I agree. But is it strictly necessary to resend for this ? > > FWIW, the attacched is what I queued locally, after complaining > "both have the same title? They need to be explained better." > > In any case, I sense that 2/2 will be redone using strbuf, from the > looks of what is discussed in a subthread nearby?
Yes, it seems to me correct, I resend the patch 2/2 based on the review thank you all > > Thanks. > > commit 8d7aa4ba6a00b3ff69261e88b4842c0df5662125 > Author: Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri Jan 13 17:58:00 2017 +0000 > > builtin/commit.c: remove the PATH_MAX limitation via dynamic allocation > > Remove the PATH_MAX limitation from the environment setting that > points to a filename by switching to dynamic allocation. > > As a side effect of this change, we also reduce the snprintf() > calls, that may silently truncate results if the programmer is not > careful. > > Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> > Helped-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net> > Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> > > commit 2a7e328877982557d921a398af9442093290c613 > Author: Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri Jan 13 17:58:01 2017 +0000 > > builtin/commit.c: switch to xstrfmt(), instead of snprintf() > > Switch to dynamic allocation with xstrfmt(), so we can avoid dealing > with magic numbers in the code and reduce the cognitive burden from > the programmers. The original code is correct, but programmers no > longer have to count bytes needed for static allocation to know that. > > As a side effect of this change, we also reduce the snprintf() > calls, that may silently truncate results if the programmer is not > careful. > > Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> > Helped-by: Jeff King <p...@peff.net> > Signed-off-by: Elia Pinto <gitter.spi...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com>
