Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/3] pedantic errors in next

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón  [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Building next with pedantic enabled shows the following 2 issues that
were originally in ew/many-alternate-optim, apologies for not catching
them earlier.

This of course affects 'master'.

The first two look trivially correct and I am tempted to take them
in -rc2; the last one, from my cursory look, I didn't see anything
wrong in it, but is not all that urgent, either.

Agreed on all counts.

I've been starting to think oidtree/cbtree would be better
done as BSD-style macro-defined functions (similar to how
khash.h is, or sys/{queue,tree}.h on *BSD systems).

I prefer Linux(kernel)-style container_of generics since I find
them easier-to-follow and have extra type-checking, but with a
flex-array it's not pedantically correct.

So I guess using CPP like khash does might be a better way to
go, here.

Thoughts?


Side note: I've also been considering Perl as a more powerful
CPP replacement so I could use the same code for a persistent
on-disk store (it would be easier to swap in pread/mmap use).
An on-disk format could make it good for refs and pre-packed
object storage (perhaps replacing loose objects).