Re: Use of strbuf.buf when strbuf.len == 0

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Pierre Habouzit wrote:

  I can see a way, that would need special proof-reading of the strbuf
module, but should not harm its users, that would be to change
STRBUF_INIT to work this way:

  { .buf = "", .len = 0, .alloc = 0 }

I'd like to pipe up a bit here..

I think the above is a good fix for the current problem of wanting to 
always be able to use "sb->buf", but I thinkit actually has the potential 
to fix another issue entirely.

Namely strbuf's that are initialized from various static strings and/or 
strings not directly allocated with malloc().

That's not necessarily something really unusual. Wanting to initialize a 
string with a fixed constant value is a common problem.

And wouldn't it be nice if you could actually do that, with

	{ .buf = "static initializer", .len = 18, .alloc = 0 }

and have all the strbuf routines that modify the initializer (including 
making it shorter!) notice that the allocation is too short, and create a 
new allocation?

Hmm?

			Linus