From: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 09:01:29 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use strpbrk(3) to search for characters from a given set
Message-ID: <CAN0heSpwNg0MKN7SCRi9b2CnxwQdCwxpc4LEkeVV4f9mxtYkLA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4140dade-d999-a74a-1f8e-06eedb84ed20@web.de>

On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 at 19:53, René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de> wrote:
>
> We can check if certain characters are present in a string by calling
> strchr(3) on each of them, or we can pass them all to a single
> strpbrk(3) call.  The latter is shorter, less repetitive and slightly
> more efficient, so let's do that instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
> ---
>  builtin/show-branch.c              | 2 +-
>  compat/mingw.c                     | 2 +-
>  mailinfo.c                         | 3 +--
>  t/helper/test-windows-named-pipe.c | 2 +-
>  4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

I failed to identify any other spots, except for some hits in test data
(in t/t4256/1/) which are probably better left alone.

> -       if (strchr(av, '*') || strchr(av, '?') || strchr(av, '[')) {
> +       if (strpbrk(av, "*?[")) {

Indeed, the `strchr()` calls use the same haystack `av`, as opposed to
`av`/`aw` or `av++`/`av++` or so. All conversions in this patch look
good to me.

Martin