Re: [PATCH v17 05/14] ref-filter: introduce match_atom_name()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> OTOH, you are now accepting %(atom:) as a synonym to %(atom), and it's
> not clear whether this is a deliberate decition.

I would say so.  When the caller wants to reject %(atom:), the
caller can tell it by checking val[0] == '\0' and reject that.

So it is better if you did not do this:

> 	if (!body[1]) {
> 		/* "atom_name:" */
> 		*val = NULL;
> 		return 1;
> 	}

which robs that information from the caller.  It should be
sufficient to just drop the check that allows "colorx" when
expecting "color" without making any other change, I would think.

--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]