From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC3320357 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 19:28:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751032AbdGNT2n (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:28:43 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f169.google.com ([209.85.128.169]:36328 "EHLO mail-wr0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750786AbdGNT2m (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:28:42 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f169.google.com with SMTP id v60so5362127wrc.3 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 12:28:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=bWBEBbMgQ4ZgjzbcRlAIwqDJqK30ux8BisawukIjGMM=; b=aIdAyw9GGbFD9zmTle7pXlYOPGeWaBqtRYjqMRHvEMDsILTtb8Vgp0fNEy2rWp6GVO WTLlsr8+nYoXI/V3EmTRm/SukOwGGsoIrr/rdiO+XKtpt77Gk2Y8jv5Y+qwxvXlP7nuP xz6SLSB9beQ+s7yiTzaBxttf5A1Mq5NSZAh3oJ/CmjHAmKjaJB86JDNP/URe8Ny4cURz h+IW+4P7WJft1eZiirXpHUI1xTekcjZonXcXEdeJsxfT/jBAVFxcU2uhrmx1mvmx/9T1 k+Bf9pMl60/1A2GpfMWO+LMZK5zxcnIZj73rYoJ1NXpD3PtdaVF5mc4PUxMNbuKvkdRv ZZAw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=bWBEBbMgQ4ZgjzbcRlAIwqDJqK30ux8BisawukIjGMM=; b=H+jJSXnVaCpW51m6o6i0Du4pzIbCXQnHbKyJIfOfdAANjcZDWhCli3m7SkiZwntYHy VIkPiHc7+vGgDqqye73jY5ZC1mlzw2u5UgT8N5v2FVjGfeWbPQNPkHIk1jGfyMoJfkYl cu3NbYTiUZ6zDPgMXVuj27TQlfhS5r2HLYY98roZAhO+K6bOhZTEm8SLi07lspgDuaFk LLdiRjp01uGiCtdEAYNgsbwsNCGFmqeoh5cHcUK+acS+Bh3jHGd+llRwd9t1jeZHsFSJ 1/VWtj2uQIqXDA+e6mfh1WA2pAKsHDvztaKGjpe5Lcpdy5YAjNfLH1TzrM1D5O4L7/ut mecg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113Nt8cfIQYA52aQXrmYWK2qJoxCZHBXzQG2A5K1IMOCTDMOnP6I Z7u58WJd/Qx2tKlBIx4= X-Received: by 10.223.177.142 with SMTP id q14mr5023287wra.200.1500060520746; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 12:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snth (g74110.upc-g.chello.nl. [80.57.74.110]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n71sm8324406wrb.62.2017.07.14.12.28.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 12:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from avar by snth with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dW6GU-0007RK-Lu; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 21:28:38 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git List , Jeff King , =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?en=C3=A9?= Scharfe , Andreas Schwab , Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT References: <20170710070342.txmlwwq6gvjkwtw7@sigill.intra.peff.net> <962da692-8874-191c-59d4-65b9562cf87f@kdbg.org> User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux 8.8 (jessie); Emacs 25.1.1; mu4e 0.9.19 In-reply-to: Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 21:28:38 +0200 Message-ID: <87pod23jix.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 14 2017, Junio C. Hamano jotted: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > - This may be showing I am not just old fashioned but also am > ignorant, but I do not see much point in using the following in > our codebase (iow, I am not aware of places in the existing code > that they can be improved by employing these features): > > . // comments [Feel free to ignore this E-Mail and my fascination with C syntax trivia] I wouldn't advocate switching to them on this basis, but since you asked for cases where things could be improved with // comments: The other day I submitted a patch that included this line in a comment: + * "t/**.sh" and then conclude that there's a directory "t", Which you fixed up to, before integrating it: + * "t/" + "**.sh" and then conclude that there's a directory "t", That was only necessary due to limitations in one of two comment syntaxes modern C supports. Well, it wasn't *necessary*, but a compiler warned about the /* there as a possibly confusing construct, and any compiler would have ended the comment right there + errored out if it contained "t/**/*.sh".