From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 18:26:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit-slab: clarify slabname##_peek()'s return value
Message-ID: <xmqqblp4jcc2.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqftegjcne.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> But that would get a bit awkward, because peek() returns a pointer, not
>> a value (as it should, because the type we're storing may be a compound
>> type, which we generally avoid passing or returning by value).  So we'd
>> actually need to return a pointer to a zero-initialized dummy value. Not
>> impossible, but getting a bit odd.
>
> Do we have a guarantee that callers of the peek only look at, never
> touch, the location?  As long as we make it return a "const *", it
> might be OK, but a quick look at commit-slab.h tells me that we do
> not say "const".

Ah, should have read the other message ;-)