René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes: >>> + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT; >>> + const char *rel = relative_path(in, prefix, &sb); >>> + int need_quotes = *rel != '"' && strchr(rel, ' '); >> >> relative_path() does not quote, so "begins with a dq" is not a good >> test to see "if we were to pass this string to quote_c_style(), would >> we get it back quoted already so we won't have to surround the >> result with an extra pair of dq ourselves?". > > Ha!, that's true. Makes me wonder how it was still able to pass the > test suite, though.. The logic to refrain from ading extra dq-pair around the output from quote-c-style is "if it is already in a dq-pair, don't bother". The bug will trigger only when the input string has a character that needs to be quoted *and* SP in it. In such a case, relative_path() is likely to return *rel != '"' and you declare "we need to add a dq-pair ourselves", quote-c-style would give us a result in a dq-pair, and you add one extra layer. But without a test with a path with both '"' and ' ' in it, such a bug would not trigger. Brian's test only checks what happens to a path with SP in it, without any other funny characters that need quoting with quote-c-style.
