From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:05:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] builtin-help: make it possible to exclude some commands in list_commands()
Message-ID: <7vljzmwvww.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0807280442330.5526@eeepc-johanness>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

>> > +struct cmdnames {
>> > +	int alloc;
>> > +	int cnt;
>> > +	struct cmdname {
>> > +		size_t len;
>> > +		char name[1];
>> > +	} **names;
>> > +};
>> 
>> I thought we do this kind of thing using FLEX_ARRAY macro.  Is there any
>> reason its use is not appropriate here?
>
> I think that came up in the previous review round: the "name" member _is_ 
> NUL-terminated, but could have a ".exe" suffix.  The "len" member has the 
> length excluding ".exe".

Sorry, but I do understand what you are trying to explain.

Marking the flexible member at the end as "last_member[FLEX_ARRAY]" is
about a tiny bit of abstracting out how the exact decl syntax should look
like depending on the compiler.

For example, we have:

        struct git_attr {
                struct git_attr *next;
                unsigned h;
                int attr_nr;
                char name[FLEX_ARRAY];
        };

And h is _not_ the length of the name[] (it is a hash to help us find the
entry quickly).  Jjust like "len" is not the length of the name[] in your
structure.  In other words, marking as "last_member[FLEX_ARRAY]" does not
have anything to do with what other fields you have in the same structure.

Hmm, am I missing a bigger picture somewhere else?