From: Stefan Beller Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 08:36:46 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] copy_fd: pass error message back through a strbuf Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20141204075920.GA27142@peff.net> > Your solution adds a strbuf. That helps with context and stomping, but > loses readability and adds allocation. > If we changed the strbuf to a fixed-size buffer, that would help the > allocation issue. Some messages might be truncated, but it seems > unlikely in practice. It still loses readability, though. > What about a struct that has an errno-like value _and_ a fixed-size > buffer? I'm thinking something like: What do you mean by the allocation being an issue? We're only populating the error buffer in the error case, so you're not talking about performance/speed I'd assume? As error handling breaks in the least expected ways, I'd rather go with well tested string buffer codes there?