Re: [PATCH] builtin/mv.c: use correct type to compute size of an array element

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 07:02:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

   * Should we in general use sizeof(TYPE) in these cases, instead
     of the size of the zeroth element, e.g.

 		memmove(source + i, source + i + 1,
			n * sizeof(source[i]));
    
     It would have been caught by the above Coccinelle rule (we are
     taking the size of *dst).

I'm not sure I understand this. As you noted in a later email, using
sizeof(TYPE) is less maintainable if the type of "source" changes.

Sorry for a typo or thinko, whichever one you like ;-)

But
later you mention using "*source" instead of "source[i]". I don't think
there is a particular reason to prefer one over the other from the
compiler perspective. I find "*source" more idiomatic (but better still
of course is MOVE_ARRAY, which removes the choice entirely).

Yes, I wrote source[i] there only because I found it somewhat
awkward to write source[0] or *source there, when the moved
(sub)array is from the index 'i' to the end.  *(source + i) would
have matched the intention better but it still is awkward.