On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 03:04:01PM +0200, larsxschnei...@gmail.com wrote:
> +int packet_write_gently_fmt(int fd, const char *fmt, ...)
> +{
> + static struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
> + va_list args;
> +
> + strbuf_reset(&buf);
> + va_start(args, fmt);
> + format_packet(1, &buf, fmt, args);
> + va_end(args);
> + packet_trace(buf.buf + 4, buf.len - 4, 1);
> + return (write_in_full(fd, buf.buf, buf.len) == buf.len ? 0 : -1);
> +}
Could the end of this function just be:
return packet_write_gently(fd, buf.buf, buf.len);
? I guess we'd prefer to avoid that, because it incurs an extra
memmove() of the data.
Similarly, I'd think this could share code with the non-gentle form
(which should be able to just call this and die() if returns an error).
Though sometimes the va_list transformation makes that awkward.
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
