On 11/30/2012 03:20 PM, Carl Worth wrote:
Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> writes:
Other than than, looks good to me...thanks Carl!
Reviewed-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org>
Thanks, Ken. Pushed now.
Someday we may want to use ralloc's rewrite_tail functions to avoid the
extra strlen() overhead. But that can be done separately.
I took a look at this now. It looks like there are only rewrite_tail
variants of ralloc_asprintf, which feel heavy here. I'd prefer a variant
of ralloc_strcat that would give the better efficiency, (and the
documentation of ralloc_strcat could then point to the alternate
function).
Perhaps the new function could be named ralloc_rewrite_tail? Compared to
something like ralloc_strcat_rewrite_tail that would be a less awkward
name, and would also avoid suggesting that the new string is always
appended to the end, (in the case where the passed length is shorter
than the current string's length).
Yeah, I'm definitely in favor of creating a ralloc_rewrite_tail function.
I almost added them when I reworked the preprocessor, but a bunch of the
calls needed printf-like functionality anyway, so I decided just to use
it everywhere and put off making a new function.
The only naming question left after that would be what to name the
tail-rewriting variant of ralloc_strncat?
-Carl
Sadly, that is the trickiest part :) I do like "ralloc_rewrite_tail",
as it's simple and feels natural. It doesn't mention strings, but I
don't think it needs to.
Going with that, perhaps ralloc_rewrite_tail_n()?
Another alternative would be ralloc_strn_rewrite_tail(). That seems
fairly clear (the "strn" concept is familiar, and can be pronounced
"stern"...), but it almost begs for ralloc_str_rewrite_tail() for
consistency. And that doesn't roll off the tongue as well.
I'm pretty tempted by ralloc_rewrite_tail & ralloc_strn_rewrite_tail.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
