Re: [RFC][PATCH] t-prio-queue: simplify using compound literals

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 8, 2024, 16:57 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqo7ajdc6y.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20240407012844.GC1085004@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

>> We should still be hesitant against the practice to the same degree
>> that we are hesitant against struct assignment, especially when the
>> struct is of nontrivial size, or the struct has a pointer member
>> whose memory ownership semantics goes against shallow copying of the
>> struct.
>
> Good point. There are really two thresholds: is this something that
> should be totally forbidden, and is this something that is generally a
> good idea. I think the answers here are "no" and "yes" respectively.

I agree with your conclusion but I found the above a bit confusing.

Between "totally horrible, do not even think about it" (0%) and "that is of course an excellent idea" (100%), you want to have two points "might have some merit but not acceptable" (33%) and something else that is less than "of course an excellent idea" but still acceptable (66%)? I would not phrase the last threshold "is generally a good idea", though. "It is not generally a good idea, but in this case, it is an adequate solution", maybe.