From: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:28:08 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Replace calls to strbuf_init(&foo, 0) with static STRBUF_INIT initializer
Message-ID: <81b0412b0810091428o6a4ea772q6a10cd295e4fcd7d@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <UUi8gSMV6CruoYIkVNOQZ4FNzsbqZcSNu6jdYH8GqIo@cipher.nrlssc.navy.mil>

2008/10/9 Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>:
> Many call sites use strbuf_init(&foo, 0) to initialize local strbuf variable
> "foo" which has not been accessed since its declaration. These can be
> replaced with a static initialization using the STRBUF_INIT macro which is
> just as readable, saves a function call, and takes up fewer lines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>
> ---
>
>
> This does the same thing for strbuf_init() that the last one did for memset().
>

But it does this using a predefined interface (using the STRBUG_INIT macro),
so next time strbuf changed, the code using it may be left as is.

I didn't like the memset->zero-init, but I do like this one.
It is a bit unclear, by the way, why strbuf_init wasn't inlined.