Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] pkt-line: extract set_packet_header()

> On 04 Aug 2016, at 18:14, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
>> The cost of write() may vary on other platforms, but the cost of memcpy
>> generally shouldn't. So I'm inclined to say that it is not really worth
>> micro-optimizing the interface.
>> 
>> I think the other issue is that format_packet() only lets you send
>> string data via "%s", so it cannot be used for arbitrary data that may
>> contain NULs. So we do need _some_ other interface to let you send a raw
>> data packet, and it's going to look similar to the direct_packet_write()
>> thing.
> 
> OK.  That is a much better argument than "I already stuff the length
> bytes in my buffer" (which will invite "How about stop doing that?")
> to justify a new "I have N bytes of data, send it out", whose
> signature would look more like write(2) and deserve to be called
> packet_write() but unfortunately the name is taken by what should
> have called packet_fmt() or something, but that squats on a good
> name packet_write().  Sigh.