Re: [PATCH] branch: colour upstream branches

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 14, 2013, 23:54 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s38e4n_jKC-f973JJUXuxkD2dqP+ECwzxvUMWxit2P2PA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8AGFEEkS2qQygnbZOorGv=DKc2OgC-nZ47+k2oYGBBD2Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 24 quoted lines

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Felipe Contreras
>>> <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> +       char fancy[80];
>>>>
>>>> -       if (show_upstream_ref)
>>>> +       if (show_upstream_ref) {
>>>>                 ref = shorten_unambiguous_ref(branch->merge[0]->dst, 0);
>>>> +               if (want_color(branch_use_color))
>>>> +                       snprintf(fancy, sizeof(fancy), "%s%s%s",
>>>> +                                       GIT_COLOR_BLUE, ref, GIT_COLOR_RESET);
>>>> +               else
>>>> +                       strncpy(fancy, ref, sizeof(fancy));
>>>> +       }
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Please use strbuf for "fancy".
>>
>> Why? We would need to initialize and free it. What's the advantage?
>
> From a quick glance, I don't see any gurantee that "ref" (plus ansi
> codes) will always fit in 80 bytes.

Would changing it to 1024 (MAXREFLEN) fix it?

-- 
Felipe Contreras