Re: [PATCH] branch: reset instead of release a strbuf

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 4, 2017, 02:19 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqvajvfydm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20171003234919.qsr54ncmw6cihowi@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 21 quoted lines

>>  /**
>>   * Release a string buffer and the memory it used. You should not use the
>> - * string buffer after using this function, unless you initialize it again.
>> + * string buffer after using this function.
>>   */
>>  extern void strbuf_release(struct strbuf *);
>
> I think it's actually OK to use the string buffer after this function.
> It's just an empty string.
>
> Perhaps we should be more explicit: this releases any resources and
> resets to a pristine, empty state. I suspect strbuf_detach() probably
> should make the same claim.
>
> Earlier you mentioned:
>
>> It is still not advisable to call strbuf_release until done using a
>> strbuf because it is wasteful, so keep that part of the advice.
>
> Is this what you meant? If so, I think we should probably be more
> explicit in giving people a hint to use strbuf_reset() for efficiency.

Yes, "should not use" above is simply misleading. Either drop it altogether, or say something like

	If you find yourself reusing the same strbuf in a loop and
	calling strbuf_release() each iteration, you may want to
	consider if it makes more sense to use strbuf_reset()
	instead in each iteration and calling strbuf_release() at
	the end.

perhaps.