Re: [RFC 16/17] object_array_entry: copy name before storing in name field
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:57:20
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 04:42:38PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
quoted
quoted
* Many callers store the empty string ("") as the name; for example, most of the entries created during a run of rev-list have "" as their name. This means that lots of needless copies of "" are being made. I think that the best solution to this problem would be to store NULL rather than "" for such entries, but I haven't figured out all of the places where the name is used.Use strbufs? No allocation (except for the strbuf object itself) is needed for empty strings, and string ownership and be transferred to and from it to prevent extra copies.That would cost two extra size_t per object_array_entry. I have the feeling that this structure is used often enough that the extra overhead would be a disadvantage, but I'm not sure. The obvious alternative would be to teach users to deal with NULL and either add another constructor alternative that transfers string ownership or *always* transfer string ownership and change the callers to call xstrdup() if they don't already own the name string. I think I will try that approach first.
You could use the same trick that strbuf does: instead of NULL, point to a well-known empty string literal. Readers do not have to care about this optimization at all; only writers need to recognize the well-known pointer value. And since we do not update in place but only eventually free, it really is just that anyone calling free() would do "if (name != well_known_empty_string)". -Peff