Re: [PATCH] git-compat-util.h: introduce CALLOC(x)

> On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 08:57:21AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
>>
>> > In git.git, it is sometimes common to write something like:
>> >
>> >     T *ptr;
>> >     CALLOC_ARRAY(ptr, 1);
>> >
>> > ...but that is confusing, since we're not initializing an array.
>>
>> Given that "man calloc" tells us that calloc takes two parameters,
>>
>>     void *calloc(size_t nmemb, size_t size);
>>
>> I personally find CALLOC() that takes only a single parameter and is
>> capable only to allocate a single element array very much confusing.
>
> Hmm. I have always considered "calloc" a mental shorthand for "zero
> initialize some bytes on the heap". It seemed like you were in favor of
> such a change in:
>
>     https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqq8rl8ivlb.fsf@gitster.g/
>
> ...but it's entirely possible that I misread your message, in which case
> I would not be sad if you dropped this patch on the floor since I don't
> feel that strongly about it.
>
> I'd be fine to call it CALLOC_ONE() or something, but I'm not sure at
> that point if it's significantly better to write "CALLOC_ONE(x)" versus
> "CALLOC_ARRAY(foo, 1)"
>
>> It _might_ be arguable that the order of the parameters CALLOC_ARRAY
>> takes should have been reversed in that the number of elements in
>> the array should come first just like in calloc(), while the pointer
>> that is used to infer the size of an array element should come next,
>> but that is water under the bridge.
>
> Yes, I agree that that would be better. But it would be frustrating to
> make a tree-wide change of that magnitude at this point. So I agree it's
> water under the bridge ;-).