On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> 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);
--
Duy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
