On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 03:02:21PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

We're about to introduce our own `reftable_buf` type to replace
`strbuf`. Get rid of the seldomly-used `strbuf_addf()` function such
that we have to reimplement one less function.

Hmm. I count twelve calls to strbuf_addf() here in this patch that were
rewritten in terms of snprintf()ing to a temporary buffer. So I am not
sure that I agree that it is "seldomly-used".

Sure, implementing fewer functions is nice, but I am not sure that
forcing the caller to use snprintf() directly is necessarily a
worthwhile trade-off.

Part of me wishes that we didn't have to write our own `reftable_buf` in
the first place. Could we use `strbuf` as-is and expose it through a
generic reftable-specific interface that users of reftable fill in with
a vtable or something?

Thanks,
Taylor