From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2025 19:21:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] string-list: change "string_list_find_insert_index" return type to "size_t"
Message-ID: <xmqq1pofv3dg.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <aL_HySU6d1a9qIBf@pks.im>

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

>> @@ -266,7 +265,7 @@ static struct string_list_item *lookup_prefix(struct string_list *map,
>>  	 * overlong key would be inserted, which must come after the
>>  	 * real location of the key if one exists.
>>  	 */
>> -	while (0 <= --i && i < map->nr) {
>> +	while (i-- > 0 && i < map->nr) {
>
> This could simply be `while (i-- && i < map->nr)`.

Yes, especially if the reason why we avoid "not negative" aka "0 <="
is because the counter is now unsigned, yours is much more intuitive
way to say "as long as i is not yet zero".  Alternatively you could
say "while (i-- != 0 && ...", but not comparing with 0 is more
customary.

Better yet, shouldn't we stay away from "i", if the point of the
change is to make it unsigned, as "i" has a strong connotation with
"int, the platform natural signed integer type"?