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 12:44:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ec635d0d-00ca-2419-3c1a-9b0343b46daa@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy313p5hn.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
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
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-13 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-11 22:03 [PATCH] range-diff: fix some 'hdr-check' and sparse warnings Ramsay Jones
2019-07-12 5:21 ` Johannes Sixt
2019-07-12 16:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-07-13 10:44 ` Johannes Sixt [this message]
2019-07-13 12:18 ` Johannes Sixt
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
2020-10-02 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-10-04 18:35 ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-07-14 8:15 ` Johannes Sixt
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=ec635d0d-00ca-2419-3c1a-9b0343b46daa@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
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).