On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 11:53:35PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
> "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 08:34:13AM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> Daniel Veillard <veillard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 11:21:31PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> >> "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > + * virBufferURIEncodeString:
> >> >> > + * @buf: the buffer to append to
> >> >> > + * @str: the string argument which will be URI-encoded
> >> >> > + *
> >> >> > + * Append the string to the buffer. The string will be URI-encoded
> >> >> > + * during the append (ie any non alpha-numeric characters are replaced
> >> >> > + * with '%xx' hex sequences).
> >> >> > + *
> >> >> > + * Returns 0 successful, -1 in case of internal or API error.
> >> >> > + */
> >> >> > +int
> >> >> > +virBufferURIEncodeString (virBufferPtr buf, const char *str)
> >> >> > +{
> >> >> > + int grow_size = 0;
> >> >> > + const char *p;
> >> >> > + unsigned char uc;
> >> >> > + const char *hex = "0123456789abcdef";
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + for (p = str; *p; ++p) {
> >> >> > + /* Want to leave only strict 7 bit ASCII alphanumerics ... */
> >> >> > + if ((*p >= '0' && *p <= '9') ||
> >> >> > + (*p >= 'a' && *p <= 'z') ||
> >> >> > + (*p >= 'A' && *p <= 'Z'))
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > + for (p = str; *p; ++p) {
> >> >> > + if ((*p >= '0' && *p <= '9') ||
> >> >> > + (*p >= 'a' && *p <= 'z') ||
> >> >> > + (*p >= 'A' && *p <= 'Z'))
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Rich,
> >> >>
> >> >> What do you think of using this?
> >> >>
> >> >> isascii (*p) && isalnum (*p)
> >> >
> >> > I have learned to be very cautious of the is* macros because they
> >> > tend to be local dependant whichis usually really not what you would
> >> > like or expect. In that case this may work, but explicit ranges
> >> > are 100% clear about what you intend to accept or not, that's why I
> >> > usually prefer them.
> >>
> >> You're right that we shouldn't use isalnum here.
> >> However, we shouldn't use inequality comparisons, either.
> >> While 0 <= c <= 9 is guaranteed to be ok for the digits, the
> >> a..z and A..Z ranges need not be contiguous, i.e., with EBCDIC:
> >
> > Seriously who gives a damn about EBCDIC anymore.
>
> Daniel and Daniel,
>
> Personally, I don't care at all, but I suspect that people using z/OS
> and OS/390 care, among others. Some might even be Red Hat customers.
> What's wrong with making the code portable, just in case?
Portability while certainly worthwhile isn't absolute - we only have finite
development time. While we could spend that time worrying about EBCDIC and
other platforms we're not likely to encounter any time soon, there is a
tradeoff to be made at some point where we have to get back to actually
developing features that matter to the 99.99999% of our userbase who isn't
EBCDIC. I'm not saying we should go out of our way to break other platforms,
but there's a cost/benefit tradeoff to be had.
> > This just makes it totally unreadable.
>
> This just makes *what* totally unreadable?
The giant switch statements is what I was referring to.
> I proposed to do this:
>
> for (p = str; *p; ++p) {
> is_alphanum (*p)
> ...
>
> for (p = str; *p; ++p) {
> is_alphanum (*p)
I've no objection to this - just the giant switch statement.
Dan.
--
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=|
|=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=|
|=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list