Re: [PATCH 06/21] convert manual allocations to argv_array
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:08:19
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 03:29:29AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote:
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 3:10 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 03:07:00AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote:quoted
quoted
+ /* argv strings are now owned by pathspec */ + paths.argc = 0; + argv_array_clear(&paths);This overly intimate knowledge of the internal implementation of argv_array_clear() is rather ugly.Yep, I agree. Suggestions? We can just leak the array of "char *". This function is called only once per program invocation, and that's unlikely to change. I guess we can make an argv_array_detach_strings() function. Or maybe even just argv_array_detach() would be less gross, and then this function could manually free the array but not the strings themselves.The latter is what I was thinking, and I agree that argv_array_detach() would be less gross than argv_array_detach_strings(), however, it also feels a bit wrong since this sort of ownership transfer is kind of out of scope for argv_array. I wonder if a simple "dup'ing" string_list would be more suitable for this case. You'd have to append the NULL item manually with string_list_append_nodup(), and string_list_clear() would then be the correct way to dispose of the list without intimate knowledge of its implementation and no need for an API extension.
A string_list doesn't just store pointers; it's a struct with a util field. So you can't pass it to things expecting a "const char **". I think argv_array_detach() is the least-bad thing here. It matches strbuf_detach() to say "you now own the storage" (as opposed to just peeking at argv.argv, which we should do only in a read-only way). -Peff