git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>,
	Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com>,
	GIT Mailing-list <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] range-diff: fix some 'hdr-check' and sparse warnings
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 14:18:18 +0200
Message-ID: <f72d8bb6-f55d-a78f-68b4-c015c1e43f25@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec635d0d-00ca-2419-3c1a-9b0343b46daa@kdbg.org>

Am 13.07.19 um 12:44 schrieb Johannes Sixt:
> Am 12.07.19 um 18:44 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> writes:
>>
>>> Am 12.07.19 um 00:03 schrieb Ramsay Jones:
>>>> diff --git a/range-diff.c b/range-diff.c
>>>> index ba1e9a4265..0f24a4ad12 100644
>>>> --- a/range-diff.c
>>>> +++ b/range-diff.c
>>>> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ static int read_patches(const char *range, struct string_list *list)
>>>>  		}
>>>>  
>>>>  		if (starts_with(line, "diff --git")) {
>>>> -			struct patch patch = { 0 };
>>>> +			struct patch patch = { NULL };
>>>
>>> There is nothing wrong with 0 here. IMHO, zero-initialization should
>>> *always* be written as = { 0 } and nothing else. Changing 0 to NULL to
>>> pacify sparse encourages a wrong style.
>>
>> Hmm, care to elaborate a bit?  Certainly, we have a clear preference
>> between these two:
>>
>> 	struct patch patch;
>> 	patch.new_name = 0;
>> 	patch.new_name = NULL;
>>
>> where the "char *new_name" field is the first one in the structure.
>> We always try to write the latter, even though we know they ought to
>> be equivalent to the language lawyers.
> 
> I'm not questioning this case; the latter form is clearly preferable.
> 
> Using only = { 0 } for zero-initialization makes the code immune to
> rearrangements of the struct members. That is not the case with = { NULL
> } because it requires that the first member is a pointer; if
> rearrangement makes the first member a non-pointer, the initializations
> must be adjusted.
> 
> On the other hand, I'm not arguing that
> 
>   struct string_list dup_it = { NULL, 0, 0, 1, NULL };
> 
> should be written as
> 
>   struct string_list dup_it = { 0, 0, 0, 1, 0 };
> 
> I'm only complaining about the single-initializer = { 0 } "please

Of course, I'm not "complaining about" it; I'm "arguing for" it...

> initialize this whole struct with zero values" form.
> 
>> Is the reason why you say 0 is fine here because we consider
>>
>> 	struct patch patch, *dpatch;
>> 	memset(&patch, 0, sizeof(patch));
>> 	dpatch = xcalloc(1, sizeof(patch));
>>
>> are perfectly good way to trivially iniitialize an instance of the
>> struct?
> 
> Absolutely not. Both forms are evildoing as far as struct initialization
> is concerned because they ignore the types of the members. The memset
> form should always be replaced by = { 0 }. The correct replacement for
> the xcalloc form would be
> 
> 	struct patch zero = { 0 };
> 	struct patch *dpatch = xmalloc(sizeof(*dpatch));
> 	*dpatch = zero;
> 
> but I do understand that this transformation is unacceptably verbose.
> 
>> Do we want to talk to sparse folks about this?
> 
> I've no idea which camp they are in. How would they respond to an
> exceptional case that is also very much a matter of taste?
> 
> -- Hannes
> 


  reply index

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-11 22:03 Ramsay Jones
2019-07-12  5:21 ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-12 16:44   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-13 10:44     ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-13 12:18       ` Johannes Sixt [this message]
2019-07-13 12:56       ` Carlo Arenas
2019-07-13 21:29       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-13 22:22         ` Carlo Arenas
2019-07-14  0:51           ` Jeff King
2019-07-14  8:30             ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-15 14:46               ` Jeff King
2019-07-15 17:30                 ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-15 18:15                   ` Jeff King
2019-07-16 19:01                     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-16 20:01                       ` Jeff King
2019-07-17 18:13                         ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-17 19:21                           ` Jeff King
2019-07-17 20:10                             ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-17 17:23                       ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-15 14:47           ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-07-14  8:15         ` Johannes Sixt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f72d8bb6-f55d-a78f-68b4-c015c1e43f25@kdbg.org \
    --to=j6t@kdbg.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com \
    --cc=t.gummerer@gmail.com \
    /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

git@vger.kernel.org list mirror (unofficial, one of many)

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror http://public-inbox.org/git
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git

Newsgroups are available over NNTP:
	nntp://news.public-inbox.org/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/inbox.comp.version-control.git
	nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git

 note: .onion URLs require Tor: https://www.torproject.org/

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox