Re: [PATCH] seq_buf: Introduce DECLARE_SEQ_BUF and seq_buf_cstr()

[Kees Cook]

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:02:47PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 10:54:26 -0700
> Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > Do we really need to call it _cstr? Why not just have seq_buf_str() ?
> > > 
> > > I mean, this is C, do we need to state that in the name too?  
> > 
> > I'm fine either way. I did that just to make the distinction between our
> > length-managed string of characters interface (seq_buf), and the
> > %NUL-terminated string of characters (traditionally called "C String" in
> > other languages). And it was still shorter than "seq_buf_terminate(s);
> > s->buffer" ;)
> 
> Do you believe that people might get confused with it as seq_buf_str()?
> 
> Can you envision that we would want a seq_buf_str() and seq_buf_cstr() that
> do something different?

No, I see your point. Like I said, I don't care either way. I was just
explaining why I did it that way. "string" means a lot of things to
different people. "C String" is unambiguous, and I try to be unambiguous
whenever possible. :)

I'll send a v2 as seq_buf_str()...

-- 
Kees Cook