git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>, "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
	"Andreas Schwab" <schwab@linux-m68k.org>,
	"Johannes Sixt" <j6t@kdbg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 13:36:58 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170714173658.2q24oxhatwh5qrqk@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqlgnrq9qi.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 09:11:33AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> As to other things that we currently not allow in our codebase that
> newer compilers can grok, here is what *I* think.  It is *not* meant
> to be an exhaustive "what's new in C99 that is not in C89? what is
> the final verdict on each of them?":
> 
>  - There were occasional cases where we wished if variable-length
>    arrays, flexible array members and variadic macros were available
>    in our codebase during the course of this project.  We would
>    probably want to add a similar test baloon patch for each of
>    them to this series that is currently two-patch long.

I think variable-length arrays are potentially dangerous. They're
allocated on the stack, which creates two issues:

  1. You can run out of stack space and segfault, whereas the same
     operation with a heap buffer would be fine. You can say "but this
     VLA will only be used for small things". But then, you can just as
     easily declare a small stack buffer.

  2. My understanding of the recent "Stack Clash" class of
     vulnerabilities[1] is that VLAs make the attacker's job much easier
     (since they can often just send a large input to get you to
     allocate a large stack).

I think variadic macros are a good candidate, though. There have been a
number of times where we've had to sacrifice functionality or
readability in our helper functions. E.g., the case mentioned in
368953912 (add helpers for allocating flex-array structs, 2016-02-22).

The weather-balloon patch for that should be easy, too: just drop the
fallback macros from BUG() or the trace code.

[1] https://www.qualys.com/2017/06/19/stack-clash/stack-clash.txt

>  - I prefer to keep decl-after-statement out of our codebase.  I
>    view it as a big plus in code-readability to be able to see a
>    complete list of variables that will be used in a block upfront
>    before starting to read the code that uses them.
> 
>  - Corollary to the above, I do not mind to have a variable
>    declaration in the initialization clause of a for() statement
>    (e.g. "for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++) { ... }"), as the scoping rule
>    is very sensible.  Some of our "for()" statements use the value
>    of the variable after iteration, for which this new construct
>    cannot be used, though.

I agree with both of those points. I think the decl-in-for is nice
exactly because it highlights those cases where the iteration variable's
value is relevant after the loop ends.

>  - 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
>    . restricted pointers
>    . static and type qualifiers in parameter array declarators

Agreed, though I think the comment thing is a personal taste issue (just
not my taste).

> +static int clean_use_color = -1;
> +static char clean_colors[][COLOR_MAXLEN] = {
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_RESET] = GIT_COLOR_RESET,
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_PLAIN] = GIT_COLOR_NORMAL,
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_PROMPT] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_BLUE,
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_HEADER] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD,
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_HELP] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_RED,
> +	[CLEAN_COLOR_ERROR] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_RED,
> +};

I think this is much nicer to read. I assume if we have a "hole" in our
numbering that the hole is initialized in the usual static way (a
COLOR_MAXLEN array full of NULs in this case, I guess)?

-Peff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-07-14 17:37 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 [this message]
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

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

  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=20170714173658.2q24oxhatwh5qrqk@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
    --cc=l.s.r@web.de \
    --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.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).