You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It's currently the responsibility of the caller to give
fill_sha1_file() enough bytes to write into, leading them to
manually compute the required lengths. Instead, let's just
write into a strbuf so that it's impossible to get this
wrong.
The alt_odb caller already has a strbuf, so this makes
things strictly simpler. The other caller, sha1_file_name(),
uses a static PATH_MAX buffer and dies when it would
overflow. We can convert this to a static strbuf, which
means our allocation cost is amortized (and as a bonus, we
no longer have to worry about PATH_MAX being too short for
normal use).
This does introduce some small overhead in fill_sha1_file(),
as each strbuf_addchar() will check whether it needs to
grow. However, between the optimization in fec501d
(strbuf_addch: avoid calling strbuf_grow, 2015-04-16) and
the fact that this is not generally called in a tight loop
(after all, the next step is typically to access the file!)
this probably doesn't matter. And even if it did, the right
place to micro-optimize is inside fill_sha1_file(), by
calling a single strbuf_grow() there.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
0 commit comments