Re: sizeof(var) vs sizeof(type), was Re: [PATCH] git: use COPY_ARRAY and MOVE_ARRAY in handle_alias()

["SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:36:44AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 9/26/2019 9:22 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Hi Peff,
> > 
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, Jeff King wrote:
> > 
> >> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:48:30PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:
> >>
> >>> Use the macro COPY_ARRAY to copy array elements and MOVE_ARRAY to do the
> >>> same for moving them backwards in an array with potential overlap.  The
> >>> result is shorter and safer, as it infers the element type automatically
> >>> and does a (very) basic type compatibility check for its first two
> >>> arguments.
> >>>
> >>> These cases were missed by Coccinelle and contrib/coccinelle/array.cocci
> >>> because the type of the elements is "const char *", not "char *", and
> >>> the rules in the semantic patch cautiously insist on the sizeof operator
> >>> being used on exactly the same type to avoid generating transformations
> >>> that introduce subtle bugs into tricky code.
> >>
> >> Another good reason to use "sizeof(var)" instead of sizeof(type)". :)
> > 
> > That is indeed a very good reason, in addition to getting the type right
> > automatically (by virtue of letting the compiler pick it).
> > 
> > Should we make this an explicit guideline in our documentation?
> 
> Better yet: can we create a Coccinelle script to fix it automatically?

I've already done that well over a year ago :)  But remember not being
quite satisfied with something (no idea what it was anymore) and left
it on the backburner.

Will dig it out and have a look as time permits.