On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> strbuf: introduce strbuf_split_str_without_term()
>
> s/without/omit/
>
>> The current implementation of 'strbuf_split_buf()' includes the
>> terminator at the end of each strbuf post splitting. Add an option
>> wherein we can drop the terminator if desired. In this context
>> introduce a wrapper function 'strbuf_split_str_without_term()' which
>
> s/without/omit/
>
Oops! will change that,
>> splits a given string into strbufs without including the terminator.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <Karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> diff --git a/strbuf.c b/strbuf.c
>> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ void strbuf_tolower(struct strbuf *sb)
>> struct strbuf **strbuf_split_buf(const char *str, size_t slen,
>> - int terminator, int max)
>> + int terminator, int max, int omit_term)
>> {
>> struct strbuf **ret = NULL;
>> size_t nr = 0, alloc = 0;
>> @@ -123,14 +123,15 @@ struct strbuf **strbuf_split_buf(const char *str, size_t slen,
>>
>> while (slen) {
>> int len = slen;
>> + const char *end = NULL;
>> if (max <= 0 || nr + 1 < max) {
>> - const char *end = memchr(str, terminator, slen);
>> + end = memchr(str, terminator, slen);
>> if (end)
>> len = end - str + 1;
>> }
>> t = xmalloc(sizeof(struct strbuf));
>> strbuf_init(t, len);
>> - strbuf_add(t, str, len);
>> + strbuf_add(t, str, len - !!end * !!omit_term);
>
> This version of the patch with its minimal[1] change is much easier to
> review for correctness than the original attempt[2].
>
> [1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/281882
> [2]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/281189
>
>> ALLOC_GROW(ret, nr + 2, alloc);
>> ret[nr++] = t;
>> str += len;
>> diff --git a/strbuf.h b/strbuf.h
>> index 6ae7a72..a865a74 100644
>> --- a/strbuf.h
>> +++ b/strbuf.h
>> @@ -450,11 +450,12 @@ static inline int strbuf_strip_suffix(struct strbuf *sb, const char *suffix)
>> /**
>> * Split str (of length slen) at the specified terminator character.
>> * Return a null-terminated array of pointers to strbuf objects
>> - * holding the substrings. The substrings include the terminator,
>> - * except for the last substring, which might be unterminated if the
>> - * original string did not end with a terminator. If max is positive,
>> - * then split the string into at most max substrings (with the last
>> - * substring containing everything following the (max-1)th terminator
>> + * holding the substrings. The substrings include the terminator if
>> + * the value of omit_term is '0' else the terminator is excluded. The
>
> Perhaps just say "if omit_term is false" rather than "if the value of ... is 0".
>
>> + * last substring, might be unterminated if the original string did
>> + * not end with a terminator. If max is positive, then split the
>
> This bit about the last substring is perhaps too disconnected from the
> previous sentence. What if you re-word the entire thing something like
> this:
>
> If omit_term is true, the terminator will be stripped from all
> substrings. Otherwise, substrings will include the terminator,
> except for the final substring, if the original string lacked a
> terminator.
>
Im quite bad at this, thanks :)
>>
>> This version of the patch with its minimal[1] change is much easier to
>> review for correctness than the original attempt[2].
>
> Perhaps worthy of a Helped-by:?
Definitely! Sorry for not including that, slipped off my mind.
--
Regards,
Karthik Nayak
--
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