From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] builtin-tag.c: remove global variable to use the callback data of git-config. Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 13:54:48 -0700 Message-ID: <7vprgjakpz.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1237015035.9952.10.camel@luis-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de, gitster@pobox.com To: Carlos Rica X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 14 21:56:31 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LiauA-0001tc-US for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:56:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754376AbZCNUy7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:54:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752718AbZCNUy6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:54:58 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:63399 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751198AbZCNUy6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:54:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F3A6861; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:54:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 16E856860; Sat, 14 Mar 2009 16:54:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <1237015035.9952.10.camel@luis-desktop> (Carlos Rica's message of "Sat, 14 Mar 2009 08:17:15 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 600AD61C-10DA-11DE-93DB-C5D912508E2D-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Carlos Rica writes: > Signed-off-by: Carlos Rica > --- > > Here I declare a struct to wrap the new local array along with its size. > QUESTION: An alternative to this is strbuf, would it be preferable? The command already uses strbuf for other purposes, so why not?