Re: [PATCH 1/4] version: refactor redact_non_printables()
- From
Usman Akinyemi <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 8, 2025, 12:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAPSxiM9krVgyXwymQSg1Y8L5qsb_xpo_FGskFcmWWBC2_Dvs0Q@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAPig+cQz+2Q7Z=uMYvKNrK2MACQC130u5iiMcsUPjNTifeWSbw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 4:05 AM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
Show 44 quoted lines
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 5:37 AM Usman Akinyemi
> <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The git_user_agent_sanitized() function performs some sanitizing to
> > avoid special characters being sent over the line and possibly messing
> > up with the protocol or with the parsing on the other side.
> >
> > Let's extract this sanitizing into a new redact_non_printables() function,
> > as we will want to reuse it in a following patch.
> >
> > For now the new redact_non_printables() function is still static as
> > it's only needed locally.
> >
> > While at it, let's also make a few small improvements:
> > - use 'size_t' for 'i' instead of 'int',
> > - move the declaration of 'i' inside the 'for ( ... )',
>
> Regarding the above two items...
>
> > - use strbuf_detach() to explicitly detach the string contained by
> > the 'buf' strbuf.
> >
> > Mentored-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Usman Akinyemi <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/version.c b/version.c
> > @@ -6,6 +6,20 @@
> > +static void redact_non_printables(struct strbuf *buf)
> > +{
> > + strbuf_trim(buf);
> > + for (size_t i = 0; i < buf->len; i++) {
> > + if (buf->buf[i] <= 32 || buf->buf[i] >= 127)
> > + buf->buf[i] = '.';
> > + }
> > +}
> > @@ -27,12 +41,8 @@ const char *git_user_agent_sanitized(void)
> > strbuf_addstr(&buf, git_user_agent());
> > - strbuf_trim(&buf);
> > - for (size_t i = 0; i < buf.len; i++) {
>
> ... the original code appears to have already been using `size_t` and
> declaring the loop variable inside the `for` statement, despite what
> the commit message says. So, is the commit message out of date? Or are
> the patches out of order? Or something else?I just investigated what happened. Another commit already added it and I did a rebase on top of the "master". I did not notice it at all. The commit message is out of date.
I will update it in the next iteration. Thank you very much. Usman.
Show 7 quoted lines
> > > - if (buf.buf[i] <= 32 || buf.buf[i] >= 127) > > - buf.buf[i] = '.'; > > - } > > - agent = buf.buf; > > + redact_non_printables(&buf); > > + agent = strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL);