From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642B61F453 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:57:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727499AbfA2Q5S (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:57:18 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:53468 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726852AbfA2Q5S (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:57:18 -0500 Received: (qmail 3759 invoked by uid 109); 29 Jan 2019 16:57:18 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:57:17 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 8565 invoked by uid 111); 29 Jan 2019 16:57:23 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:57:23 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:57:16 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:57:16 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Anders Waldenborg Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] pretty: Allow %(trailers) options with explicit value Message-ID: <20190129165715.GB7349@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20181028125025.30952-1-anders@0x63.nu> <20190128213337.24752-1-anders@0x63.nu> <20190128213337.24752-3-anders@0x63.nu> <87tvhsklpb.fsf@0x63.nu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tvhsklpb.fsf@0x63.nu> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 07:45:06AM +0100, Anders Waldenborg wrote: > > Instead of using "char buf[8]", just using a strbuf and avoidng > > strlcpy() would make the code much better, I would think. > > Yes, taking the heap allocation hit would most likely make the intent > clearer. If you can reuse the same struct and strbuf_reset() it each time, then that amortizes the cost of the heap (to basically once per program run, instead of once per commit). -Peff