From: Hardik Kumar Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:13:28 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] utf8: make utf8_strwidth() and utf8_strnwidth() return size_t Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Mon Jul 27, 2026 at 6:21 PM IST, Phillip Wood wrote: >> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c >> index 48d5251..83e4dd6 100644 >> --- a/builtin/blame.c >> +++ b/builtin/blame.c >> @@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ static void emit_other(struct blame_scoreboard *sb, struct blame_entry *ent, >> name = ci.author_mail.buf; >> else >> name = ci.author.buf; >> - pad = longest_author - utf8_strwidth(name); >> + pad = longest_author - cast_size_t_to_int(utf8_strwidth(name)); >> printf(" (%s%*s %10s", >> name, pad, "", >> format_time(ci.author_time, > > To me this example perfectly illustrates why changing the return value > of utf8_strwidth() is a bad idea. The return value is pretty much always > used to calculate a padding to pass to printf() which expects an int. By > changing the return value you're forcing all the callers to do the > conversion themselves which is a bug waiting to happen. I'm also far > from convinced that the conversions in this patch are complete: grepping > for 'utf8_strn\{0,1\}width' turns up several calls which do not appear > to be correctly converted here. For example: > > builtin/worktree.c: display[i].width = utf8_strwidth(buf.buf); > > where "width" is an int. I had intentionally left out some sites which did not seem could have any impact by implicit conversions as there are other examples of such cases where the return value of `strlen` is being assigned to an int variable. Example: in combine-diff.c (where len is an int): if (len < 0) len = strlen(line); in builtin/update-index.c: int namelen = strlen(path); and other such examples. > > I think it would be much better to remove the TODO comment as Junio > previously suggested and instead add some documentation to the function > explaining (a) why it is appropriate for it to return an int; (b) why we > must use the cast_size_t_to_int() helper to prevent overflows (see the > commit that added that comment). This can result in issues down the line and I had mentioned so in a previous mail but wanted to try it with v3 since I had already been working on it. I'll send a new patch to remove the TODO. This change might just not be worth after all. Thanks, Hardik