From: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
"Andreas Schwab" <schwab@linux-m68k.org>,
"Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 15:41:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170710224134.GA161700@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170710070342.txmlwwq6gvjkwtw7@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 07/10, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 10:05:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> writes:
> >
> > > I wonder when we can begin to target C99 in git's source, though. :)
> >
> > Let's get the ball rolling by starting to use some of the useful
> > features like designated initializers, perhaps, in a small, critical
> > and reasonably stable part of the system that anybody must compile,
> > leave it in one full release cycle or two, and when we hear nobody
> > complains, introduce it en masse for the remainder of the system?
> >
> > That way, we will see if there are people who need pre-C99 soon
> > enough, and we won't have to scramble reverting too many changes
> > when it happens.
>
> Neat idea. Something like this?
>
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT
>
> There are certain C99 features that might be nice to use in
> our code base, but we've hesitated to do so in order to
> avoid breaking compatibility with older compilers. But we
> don't actually know if people are even using pre-C99
> compilers these days.
>
> One way to figure that out is to introduce a very small use
> of a feature, and see if anybody complains. The strbuf code
> is a good place to do this for a few reasons:
>
> - it always gets compiled, no matter which Makefile knobs
> have been tweaked.
>
> - it's very stable; this definition hasn't changed in a
> long time and is not likely to (so if we have to revert,
> it's unlikely to cause headaches)
>
> If this patch can survive a few releases without complaint,
> then we can feel more confident that designated initializers
> are widely supported by our user base. It also is an
> indication that other C99 features may be supported, but not
> a guarantee (e.g., gcc had designated initializers before
> C99 existed).
>
> And if we do get complaints, then we'll have gained some
> data and we can easily revert this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> ---
> I suspected we could also do something with __STDC_VERSION__, though I
> wonder what compilers set it to when not in standards-compliant mode.
> gcc-6 claims C11 when no specific -std flag is given.
>
> And obviously before releasing this or anything similar, it would be
> nice to see results from people building pu. I'm especially curious
> whether MSVC would work with this (or if people even still use it, since
> Git for Windows is pretty mature?).
>
> strbuf.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/strbuf.h b/strbuf.h
> index 2075384e0..e705b94db 100644
> --- a/strbuf.h
> +++ b/strbuf.h
> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ struct strbuf {
> };
>
> extern char strbuf_slopbuf[];
> -#define STRBUF_INIT { 0, 0, strbuf_slopbuf }
> +#define STRBUF_INIT { .alloc = 0, .len = 0, .buf = strbuf_slopbuf }
I love that this is happening! And maybe someday soon we can do:
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
So that we can scope loop variables to the loops themselves.
--
Brandon Williams
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-10 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-10 7:03 [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT Jeff King
2017-07-10 14:57 ` Ben Peart
2017-07-10 16:04 ` Jeff King
2017-07-10 17:57 ` Ben Peart
2017-07-11 5:01 ` Mike Hommey
2017-07-11 15:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-12 19:12 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-12 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-13 22:24 ` Johannes Sixt
2017-07-10 16:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-10 17:33 ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-10 21:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-10 17:10 ` Andreas Schwab
2017-07-10 19:57 ` Johannes Sixt
2017-07-10 20:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-10 21:11 ` Johannes Sixt
2017-07-10 21:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-14 16:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-14 17:13 ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-14 17:36 ` Jeff King
2017-07-14 18:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-14 19:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-19 18:19 ` [PATCH] objects: scope count variable to loop Stefan Beller
2017-07-19 18:23 ` Brandon Williams
2017-07-24 17:08 ` Jeff King
2017-07-24 17:12 ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-24 18:05 ` Jeff King
2017-07-14 19:28 ` [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-14 22:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-14 22:43 ` Mike Hommey
2017-07-15 11:08 ` Jeff King
2017-07-11 4:38 ` Jeff King
2017-07-11 0:05 ` brian m. carlson
2017-07-11 0:07 ` Stefan Beller
2017-07-11 0:10 ` brian m. carlson
2017-07-11 5:24 ` Johannes Sixt
2017-07-12 1:26 ` brian m. carlson
2017-07-12 18:25 ` Johannes Sixt
2017-07-10 22:41 ` Brandon Williams [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170710224134.GA161700@google.com \
--to=bmwill@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=schwab@linux-m68k.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).