From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3431520357 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 18:48:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751020AbdGNSsV (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 14:48:21 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f194.google.com ([209.85.192.194]:34491 "EHLO mail-pf0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750819AbdGNSsU (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 14:48:20 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f194.google.com with SMTP id c24so11867328pfe.1 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:48:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=UXHLDUe7kWxWT24H8zWztx3DmbFghzI9CgYbJc2K55Y=; b=Xf9+3HSQ0J5U6sLpVyoBYFzsRkZ2LoCWZExvHcjNfa2fGpb1ogccByGjGBxOct6F0H ej5JKsqKymvHw3SA2qqSTGCATuyv9+qxFsDIaaci+h2gkF3ptrvtertmuCXR2M6lbaU7 IaMXEuywmOPodbk1i3aa9ed7mwjLYzzUwT/zsF6RfPbk7VnXyJ5PqCqOapi5RPUU39EU XdVRbBmEUN2afuj/KQJ5JBQpVABd9LYGmaVzKUn9vjhRkabf7ICEPkk5qaof/IPZWc5n Wxr9vGJAJllNJwJC7ESp46fNaULqnFqdcG1K1l5twwWaON/VlNyHiieDTbsUOvdaRsfa 5sGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=UXHLDUe7kWxWT24H8zWztx3DmbFghzI9CgYbJc2K55Y=; b=Fhe19nAhCZC3kFrPq7pLFxR3QBtcHj6gweWNsWEPw0mDyRTbBq/HF/81p3oJCX2e8Z Kg3CXrqepdK3BqvlinudjqiFcs9Wg9aVbAfMPZt/5ydyXKYn9LO22bSjrcQer44Wvehi FMlnbWlJCXmob6iar3Ji2qBq60XY9SlmM0zteEljcY+/uePGbATJ+fpgajVl2fBi0RZb vIk3ajRjHwNgWVvOWjJq5Eu+5Q297GYEpBaqa/aTB727QuK7O6ZWoQnM/Yttgg1XwjHi EcXOFARGhoJQL45LFbb0HGa58uWKossiqiu+q2wa6+xYGOkDlLGjqM55wiEyQu8q8UOt KTtw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111VqjBY/1R/IIFgOHsOfC4RQ++oOkmZPrLRZmf9au5CnBLZ4cA+ EGjXPJ5CNIYxQQ== X-Received: by 10.99.54.205 with SMTP id d196mr16339035pga.79.1500058099665; Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:d522:5f:8052:2b20]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z67sm15399562pgb.58.2017.07.14.11.48.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:48:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Git List , =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , Andreas Schwab , Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH] strbuf: use designated initializers in STRBUF_INIT References: <20170710070342.txmlwwq6gvjkwtw7@sigill.intra.peff.net> <962da692-8874-191c-59d4-65b9562cf87f@kdbg.org> <20170714173658.2q24oxhatwh5qrqk@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:48:14 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170714173658.2q24oxhatwh5qrqk@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 14 Jul 2017 13:36:58 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: >> +static int clean_use_color = -1; >> +static char clean_colors[][COLOR_MAXLEN] = { >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_RESET] = GIT_COLOR_RESET, >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_PLAIN] = GIT_COLOR_NORMAL, >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_PROMPT] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_BLUE, >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_HEADER] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD, >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_HELP] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_RED, >> + [CLEAN_COLOR_ERROR] = GIT_COLOR_BOLD_RED, >> +}; > > I think this is much nicer to read. I assume if we have a "hole" in our > numbering that the hole is initialized in the usual static way (a > COLOR_MAXLEN array full of NULs in this case, I guess)? I would expect that would be the case. Do we need to have a check to detect a buggy compiler that takes the syntax but produces an incorrectly initialized array? I could add a test to ensure that HEADER comes out BOLD, etc. (or we may already have such a test) and then reorder these lines in this patch, if that is the kind of breakage we anticipate.