Re: [PATCH 1/6] give "nbuf" strbuf a more meaningful name

> On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 12:54:29PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 31 Jan 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> > 
> > > > It's a shame that we can't just factor out this common
> > > > code, but I don't think it's quite long enough to merit
> > > > the boilerplate. The interesting part of each function
> > > > happens inside the loop. If C had lambdas, we could do
> > > > something like:
> > > > 
> > > >   foreach_path_from(stdin, nul_term_line) {
> > > >         /* now do something interesting with "buf"
> > > >            and some other local variables */
> > > >   }
> > 
> > Technically, we do not have to do lambdas for that paradigm, we could
> > introduce a new data type and a reader, i.e. something like this:
> > [...]
> > And then the repeated code could be replaced by something like this:
> > 
> > 	struct path_reader path_reader = PATH_READER_INIT;
> > 
> > 	while (read_next_path(&reader, stdin, 1)) {
> > 		... [work with reader->path.buf] ...
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	cleanup_path_reader();
> 
> Yeah, you're right. I was thinking of lifting the loop completely out of
> the call-sites, but simplifying it to a single line loop condition is
> just as good.
> 
> I still think this crosses my line of "too much boilerplate to be worth
> it", though.