Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:51 AM, He Sun <sunheehnus@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2014-03-01 19:21 GMT+08:00 Faiz Kothari <faiz.off93@gmail.com>:
>>>> diff --git a/remote-curl.c b/remote-curl.c
>>>> index 10cb011..dee8716 100644
>>>> --- a/remote-curl.c
>>>> +++ b/remote-curl.c
>>>> @@ -634,7 +634,7 @@ static int rpc_service(struct rpc_state *rpc, struct discovery *heads)
>>>>         if (start_command(&client))
>>>>                 exit(1);
>>>>         if (preamble)
>>>> -               write_or_die(client.in, preamble->buf, preamble->len);
>>>> +               strbuf_write_or_die(client.in, preamble);
>>>>         if (heads)
>>>>                 write_or_die(client.in, heads->buf, heads->len);
>>>
>>> This should be changed. May be you can use Ctrl-F to search write_or_die().
>>> Or if you are using vim, use "/ and n" to find all.
>>
>> It's not obvious from the patch fragment, but 'heads' is not a strbuf,
>> so Faiz correctly left this invocation alone.
>
> That is a very good sign why this change is merely a code-churn and
> not an improvement, isn't it?  We know (and any strbuf user should
> know) that ->buf and ->len are the ways to learn the pointer and the
> length the strbuf holds.  Why anybody thinks it is benefitial to
> introduce another function that is _only_ for writing out strbuf and
> cannot be used to write out a plain buffer is simply beyond me.