From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>
Cc: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>, Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] parse-options: add int value pointer to struct option
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 09:17:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq5y47mp58.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2349e897-9e0d-4341-86fc-9da117a1eb48@web.de> ("René Scharfe"'s message of "Mon, 18 Sep 2023 11:53:19 +0200")
René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> writes:
> It reduces the memory footprint, but only slightly. Saving a few bytes
> for objects with less than a hundred instances total doesn't seem worth
> the downsides.
It makes it impossible to use the both at the same time, which is a
bigger (than reduced memory) advantage. Otherwise, we would be
tempted to consider that having "void *value" and "int value_int"
next to each other and allow them to coexist may be a good solution
for a narrow corner case (please see at the end of the message you
are responding to).
As you said, use of union has its downsides that may contradict the
objective of the larger picture this topic draws.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-18 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-09 21:10 [PATCH 1/2] parse-options: add int value pointer to struct option René Scharfe
2023-09-09 21:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] parse-options: use and require int pointer for OPT_CMDMODE René Scharfe
2023-09-10 10:18 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-11 20:11 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-12 8:40 ` Jeff King
2023-09-16 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-18 9:28 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-18 10:10 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-19 7:41 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-21 11:07 ` [PATCH] am: fix error message in parse_opt_show_current_patch() Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-21 19:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-21 19:28 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-18 13:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] parse-options: use and require int pointer for OPT_CMDMODE Phillip Wood
2023-09-18 17:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-18 19:48 ` Phillip Wood
2023-10-03 8:49 ` René Scharfe
2023-10-03 17:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-19 7:47 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-11 19:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-11 20:11 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-19 9:40 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-20 8:18 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-21 10:40 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-03 8:49 ` René Scharfe
2023-10-03 9:38 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-03 17:54 ` René Scharfe
2023-10-03 18:24 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-10 18:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] parse-options: add int value pointer to struct option Taylor Blau
2023-09-11 19:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-11 22:28 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-18 11:34 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-09-18 9:53 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-18 10:28 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-09-18 16:17 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-09-20 11:34 ` René Scharfe
2023-09-11 20:12 ` René Scharfe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq5y47mp58.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).