On 12/1/20 3:41 PM, Petr Machata wrote: > >> Also, instead of magic SPRINT_BSIZE, why not take a len param (and >> name it snprint_size)? > > Because keeping the interface like this makes it possible to reuse the > macroized bits in q_cake. I feel like the three current users are > auditable enough that the implied length is not a big deal. And no new > users should pop up, as the comment at the function makes clear. >
seems reasonable and this reduces the number of users of sprint_size.
