From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 01:35:54 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-compat-util.h: introduce CALLOC(x)
Message-ID: <xmqqv8mpnwjp.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <Y46ZJUsyp8UW5rFW@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> So you can think of "allocate this one element and zero it" as "calloc,
> but don't multiply" or as "malloc, but zero". Naming it CALLOC() is
> thinking of it as the former. If we think of it as the latter it could
> perhaps be MALLOCZ() or something. I don't know if that name is too
> subtle or not. We have xmemdupz(), which is basically the same thing;
> it's only a zero-terminator, but that is because we are writing non-zero
> bytes in the rest of it. Mostly I'd worry that it is easy to glance past
> the "Z".

I think the name for the former would be CALLOC_ONE(), as I would
rephrase it as "calloc, but just one element".  I agree MALLOCZ()
would be fine for the other interpretation, and I do not have much
problem as much problem with the name as calling it CALLOC().

Thanks.