Re: [PATCH 3/3] shorten_unambiguous_ref(): avoid sscanf()

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 15, 2023, 05:10 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqsff71plf.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <Y+wN0agVK9ZQU/sT@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> It does indeed. I pulled the logic from skip_prefix(), thinking that by
> relying on it I would avoid making a stupid mistake. Oh well. :)
>
> Doing it like this is much more readable:
> ...
> I'll hold on to that (plus an adjustment to the comment below to match,
> and perhaps a test for this negative-match case) for a day or so to give
> anybody else a chance to comment, and then send out a v2 tomorrow.

Thanks, and surely that is very readable.

Alternatively, I think you can just compare refname and rule until they diverge, without doing any special casing for per-cent on the rule side inside the loop.

If you do not find any difference, or the byte that differ is not the per-cent at the beginning of "%.*s" on the rule side, they they do not match.