David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes:

> Making a single preparation run for counting the lines will avoid memory
> fragmentation.  Also, fix the allocated memory size which was wrong
> when sizeof(int *) != sizeof(int), and would have been too small
> for sizeof(int *) < sizeof(int), admittedly unlikely.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>
> ---
>  builtin/blame.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> index e44a6bb..522986d 100644
> --- a/builtin/blame.c
> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> @@ -1772,25 +1772,33 @@ static int prepare_lines(struct scoreboard *sb)
>  {
>       const char *buf = sb->final_buf;
>       unsigned long len = sb->final_buf_size;
> -     int num = 0, incomplete = 0, bol = 1;
> +     const char *end = buf + len;
> +     const char *p;
> +     int *lineno;
> +     
> +     int num = 0, incomplete = 0;

Is there any significance to the blank line between these two
variable definitions?

> +
> +     for (p = buf;;) {
> +             if ((p = memchr(p, '\n', end-p)) == NULL)
> +                     break;
> +             ++num, ++p;

You have a peculiar style that is somewhat distracting.  Why isn't
this more like so?

        for (p = buf; p++, num++; ) {
                p = memchr(p, '\n', end - p);
                if (!p)
                        break;
        }

which I think is the prevalent style in our codebase.  The same for
the other loop we see in the new code below.

 - favor post-increment unless you use it as rvalue and need
   pre-increment;

 - SP around each binary ops e.g. 'end - p';

 - avoid assignments in conditionals when you do not have to.

> +     }
>  
> -     if (len && buf[len-1] != '\n')
> +     if (len && end[-1] != '\n')
>               incomplete++; /* incomplete line at the end */

OK, so far we counted "num" complete lines and "incomplete" may be
one if there is an incomplete line after them.

> -     while (len--) {
> -             if (bol) {
> -                     sb->lineno = xrealloc(sb->lineno,
> -                                           sizeof(int *) * (num + 1));
> -                     sb->lineno[num] = buf - sb->final_buf;
> -                     bol = 0;
> -             }
> -             if (*buf++ == '\n') {
> -                     num++;
> -                     bol = 1;
> -             }
> +
> +     sb->lineno = lineno = xmalloc(sizeof(int) * (num + incomplete + 1));

OK, this function is called only once, so we know sb->lineno is NULL
originally and there is no reason to start from xrealloc().

> +     for (p = buf;;) {
> +             *lineno++ = p-buf;
> +             if ((p = memchr(p, '\n', end-p)) == NULL)
> +                     break;
> +             ++p;
>       }
> -     sb->lineno = xrealloc(sb->lineno,
> -                           sizeof(int *) * (num + incomplete + 1));

These really *were* unnecessary reallocations.

Thanks for catching them, but this patch needs heavy style fixes.

> -     sb->lineno[num + incomplete] = buf - sb->final_buf;
> +
> +     if (incomplete)
> +             *lineno++ = len;
> +
>       sb->num_lines = num + incomplete;
>       return sb->num_lines;
>  }
--
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

Reply via email to