On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:02:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 10:54:26 -0700 > Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > Do we really need to call it _cstr? Why not just have seq_buf_str() ? > > > > > > I mean, this is C, do we need to state that in the name too? > > > > I'm fine either way. I did that just to make the distinction between our > > length-managed string of characters interface (seq_buf), and the > > %NUL-terminated string of characters (traditionally called "C String" in > > other languages). And it was still shorter than "seq_buf_terminate(s); > > s->buffer" ;) > > Do you believe that people might get confused with it as seq_buf_str()? > > Can you envision that we would want a seq_buf_str() and seq_buf_cstr() that > do something different?
No, I see your point. Like I said, I don't care either way. I was just explaining why I did it that way. "string" means a lot of things to different people. "C String" is unambiguous, and I try to be unambiguous whenever possible. :) I'll send a v2 as seq_buf_str()... -- Kees Cook
