Torsten,
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:23:14AM +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 2014-06-17 09.34, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
> > Add a strnncmp() function which behaves like strncmp() except it takes
> > the length of both strings instead of just one. It behaves the same as
> > strncmp() up to the minimum common length between the strings. When the
> minimum common length? Isn'n t that 0?
> Using the word "common", I think we could call it "common length".
> (And more places below)
>
Yes, "minimum" doesn't make sense. "common length" sounds better.
> > strings are identical up to this minimum common length, the length
> > difference is returned.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeremiah Mahler <jmmahler@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > strbuf.c | 9 +++++++++
> > strbuf.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/strbuf.c b/strbuf.c
> > index ac62982..4eb7954 100644
> > --- a/strbuf.c
> > +++ b/strbuf.c
> > @@ -600,3 +600,12 @@ char *xstrdup_tolower(const char *string)
> > result[i] = '\0';
> > return result;
> > }
> > +
> strncmp uses size_t, not int:
> int strncmp(const char *s1, const char *s2, size_t n);
>
> Is there a special reason to allow negative string length?
> Some call sites use int when calling strncmp() or others,
> that is one thing.
> But when writing a generic strnncmp() function, I think
> it should use size_t, unless negative values have a meaning and
> are handled in the code.
>
Don't need negatives, size_t is more appropriate. Fixed.
>
> > +int strnncmp(const char *a, int len_a, const char *b, int len_b)
> > +{
> > + int min_len = (len_a < len_b) ? len_a : len_b;
> > + int cmp = strncmp(a, b, min_len);
>
> > + if (cmp)
> > + return cmp;
> > + return (len_a - len_b);
> > +}
Thanks,
--
Jeremiah Mahler
jmmahler@xxxxxxxxx
http://github.com/jmahler
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html