From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:27:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] add xread_in_full() helper
Message-ID: <20170925232706.ulrefbv623tinukf@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20170925221608.GF27425@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 03:16:08PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:

> Jeff King wrote:
> 
> > Many callers of read_in_full() expect to see exactly "len"
> > bytes, and die if that isn't the case.
> 
> micronit: Can this be named read_in_full_or_die?
> 
> Otherwise it's too easy to mistake for a function like xread, which
> has different semantics.
> 
> I realize that xmalloc, xmemdupz, etc use a different convention.
> That's yet another reason to be explicit, IMHO.

Yeah, we've definitely misused the "x" prefix for different things. I
agree that being explicit probably can't hurt.

I wonder if it's worth calling it "read_exactly_or_die()" to emphasize
that not reading enough bytes is a die-able offense.

-Peff