From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0274F302077; Thu, 10 Jul 2025 23:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752190223; cv=none; b=G2dwcAR6wGER20y5Ii0z5cvU+IQqfeRNy55vPNYmu3K2GwEtSgMXcmHhxVNOHBNy/ftZ5VdhPjl16tSqq9pXaS9b6WUohmMU/GDDWy9RRdxHtG5OLy97kWjBXCEmJlNru+IOVxPbGiqX9R74idvB8ApVnocR9Pdm7mFQocalJR0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752190223; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AGAfOrxuEt07tLO3k6L8Bw8HJmNVQUoDd/N/1lLMOF4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ECZEmHRgswP1jAwTUGSp6GhQXCxVi1YQoSDwhRFXOiK+vWSY1Sa5zcp9+450uqbUBjAsgfDhhl5BJYc0baaHn/82NAtCmihiFYPGrjIp5cq/J4zzKOG1d7hAyN+8ErZLvRb3wIuM7IP8JaQGVCSBj/CsZs5hHRvIDcnQX5WHYBs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=sgztZTP5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="sgztZTP5" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 1C8CA406FA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1752190221; bh=dmkt0JTbEarlvMQk+rktj5S9Or++bzNO0o99INz5e1A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=sgztZTP5YJ2DryfHlJ0TL500eqecWp4bujx4z4cw7A30+G7W8PgnJkcPF/25fz8lW +8KaWPz2IKuhj1ShgehmtJdTC8Ku1zZYaJGEZwljO11tv+5VNbDCOD3nNRe/vdCPOM YEmWvZDHJv5iGFjuJM441ppCxHshbdnuQS6t3JX2YUfXkRwot0twWI01HOBWqJZFnt p0EmcB1op/DRETs79ZBXgk2oCpRlKgZwbIiM17sXsxcsB0liHaU2EmbwWUIIZTCllW yX/93BjHd+OpUfHZdI3WSrAe7TfrMhpUr6+t7E5wLcXc3lYkb2YGvLxAKtVk9Qog9q bN8YmJDAgxxRA== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C8CA406FA; Thu, 10 Jul 2025 23:30:21 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] docs: kdoc: Improve the output text accumulation In-Reply-To: <20250710101931.202953d1@foz.lan> References: <20250702223524.231794-1-corbet@lwn.net> <20250702223524.231794-13-corbet@lwn.net> <20250710084119.3e5c1ced@foz.lan> <20250710091352.4ae01211@foz.lan> <20250710101931.202953d1@foz.lan> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 17:30:20 -0600 Message-ID: <87bjpry67n.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mauro Carvalho Chehab writes: > With that, I would just drop this patch, as the performance is > almost identical, and using "emit()" instead of "+=" IMO makes > the code less clear. I've dropped the patch - for now - but I really disagree with the latter part of that sentence. It is far better, IMO, to encapsulate the construction of our output rather than spreading vast numbers of direct string concatenations throughout the code. So this one will likely be back in a different form :) Thanks, jon