Re: [PATCH] Rewrite git-compat-util.h:skip_prefix() as a loop
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 27, 2014, 22:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq38j4xkuq.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <87k3cg47o6.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org>
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
Show 25 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Sun He <sunheehnus@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sun He <sunheehnus@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> git-compat-util.h | 4 ++--
>>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/git-compat-util.h b/git-compat-util.h
>>> index cbd86c3..4daa6cf 100644
>>> --- a/git-compat-util.h
>>> +++ b/git-compat-util.h
>>> @@ -357,8 +357,8 @@ extern int suffixcmp(const char *str, const char *suffix);
>>>
>>> static inline const char *skip_prefix(const char *str, const char *prefix)
>>> {
>>> - size_t len = strlen(prefix);
>>> - return strncmp(str, prefix, len) ? NULL : str + len;
>>> + while( *prefix != '\0' && *str++ == *prefix++ );
>>> + return *prefix == '\0' ? str : NULL;
>>
>> Documentation/CodingGuidelines?
>
> Mostly relevant for tabification here, not helping much otherwise."Imitate existing code" would let you spot that we have SP outside the () pair, not inside, for controls like while/for/if, and we usually do not explicitly compare things with 0, NULL or '\0'.
Together with the "empty statement should occupy its own line" you mentioned, I tend to agree with you that some people may benefit from them explicitly spelled out.