git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Documentation: document difference between release and free

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Jul 24, 2024, 18:02 UTC
Message-ID
<xmqqed7iu0qt.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To
<1841a256-5c01-4892-99c7-ad7df14e6e0e@gmail.com>
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
Show 30 quoted lines
>>> I noticed there is also `clear()` used in some places. Should we also
>>> mention that we don't recommend using `clear()` WRT freeing memory?
>> In any case I think we should decide on eithe using `clear()` or
>> using
>> `release()` for consistency's sake. Which of both  we use I don't quite
>> care, but the following very shoddy analysis clearly favors `release()`:
>>      $ git grep '_clear(' | wc -l
>>      844
>>      $ git grep '_release(' | wc -l
>>      2126
>
> I think a fairer comparison would be to look at function declarations,
> not all the call sites.
>
> $ { git grep 'void [a-z_]*_release(' '*.h'
>     git grep 'static void [a-z_]*_release(' '*.c'
>   } | wc -l
> 47
> $ { git grep 'void [a-z_]*_clear(' '*.h'
>     git grep 'static void [a-z_]*_clear(' '*.c'
>   } | wc -l
> 58
>
> So we have more _clear() functions than _release() functions. I think
> there may sometimes be a semantic difference between _clear() and
> _release() as well where some _clear() functions zero out the struct
> after freeing the members.
>
> Thanks for working on this it will be a useful addition to our coding
> guidelines

Thanks for doing a more thorough study of the current codebase. I tend to agree that the number of actual _clear() functions matter a lot more than how many callsites call _clear(), and it would make sense to standardise on it. If everything else being equal, it does not matter which one we pick, but it rarely happens that everything else is equal.

 - "release" is a bit more cumbersome to type and read than "clear".
 - "clear" at least to me says more about the state of the thing
   after it got cleared (e.g., I would expect it would be filled
   with NUL bytes)
 - "release" places a lot more stress on what happens to the things
   that were contained before the release takes place.

For example, upon either "clear" or "release", I would expect everything pointed by elements in an array member of the struct, and the array pointed at by the member, are free'd when we are "clearing/releasing" a strvec. But I may not care what is left in it after "release". It can be left to hold all the bytes the struct had before "release" got called, as anybody who called the function are not supposed to look at the struct again anyway. But we may choose not to have such a variant and always clear the struct after releasing resources it held, just for good hygiene.

So in short, I would consider that "clear = release + init". If we want to have both "clear" and "release" and have them distinct meaning, that is fine. If we want to simplify and do without "just release and leave them dirty" variant, then we need only one name for it, and I do not mind if we called it "release", even though I would think "clear" is a better name for the action that behaves as if "init" was done at the end to make it reusable.

Thanks.
Previous: Phillip WoodNext: Patrick Steinhardt
Message 16 of 29 in “Documentation: some coding guideline updates”
  1. 0/3 Documentation: some coding guideline updatesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 24, 2024
  2. 1/3 Documentation: clarify indentation style for C preprocessor directivesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 24, 2024
  3. Junio C HamanoJul 24, 2024
  4. Junio C HamanoJul 25, 2024
  5. Patrick SteinhardtJul 30, 2024
  6. 2/3 Documentation: document naming schema for struct-related functionsPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 24, 2024
  7. Karthik NayakJul 24, 2024
  8. Patrick SteinhardtJul 24, 2024
  9. Junio C HamanoJul 24, 2024
  10. Junio C HamanoJul 24, 2024
  11. Patrick SteinhardtJul 30, 2024
  12. 3/3 Documentation: document difference between release and freePatrick Steinhardt, Jul 24, 2024
  13. Karthik NayakJul 24, 2024
  14. Patrick SteinhardtJul 24, 2024
  15. Phillip WoodJul 24, 2024
  16. Junio C HamanoJul 24, 2024
  17. Patrick SteinhardtJul 30, 2024
  18. Junio C HamanoJul 24, 2024
  19. Patrick SteinhardtJul 30, 2024
  20. Karthik NayakJul 24, 2024
  21. 0/5 Documentation: some coding guideline updatesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  22. 1/5 clang-format: fix indentation width for preprocessor directivesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  23. Karthik NayakJul 30, 2024
  24. 2/5 Documentation: clarify indentation style for C preprocessor directivesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  25. 3/5 Documentation: document naming schema for structs and their functionsPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  26. 4/5 Documentation: document idiomatic function namesPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  27. 5/5 Documentation: consistently use spaces inside initializersPatrick Steinhardt, Jul 30, 2024
  28. Junio C HamanoJul 30, 2024
  29. Karthik NayakJul 31, 2024

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.