David Kastrup, Sun, Oct 07, 2007 18:07:17 +0200:
> Miles Bader <miles@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >>> strbuf->buf is always non-NULL and NUL-terminated so you could just do
> >>>
> >>> static inline int strbuf_cmp(const struct strbuf *a, const struct strbuf *b)
> >>> {
> >>> int len = a->len < b->len ? a->len : b->len;
> >>> return memcmp(a->buf, b->buf, len + 1);
> >>> }
> >>
> >> doesn't work, because a buffer can have (in some very specific cases)
> >> an embeded NUL.
> >
> > Couldn't you then just do:
> >
> > int len = a->len < b->len ? a->len : b->len;
> > int cmp = memcmp(a->buf, b->buf, len);
> > if (cmp == 0)
> > cmp = b->len - a->len;
> > return cmp;
> >
> > [In the case where one string is a prefix of the other, then the longer
> > one is "greater".]
> >
> > ?
>
> I fail to see where this variant is simpler than what we started the
> journey of simplification from.
>
> The only change I consider worth checking from the whole series in
> this thread is making the function inline.
It also makes arguments const (which admittedly wont make it faster).
> ... All the rest pretty much
> was worse than what we started from in that it needed to reevaluate
> more conditions and turned out more complicated and obfuscate even to
> the human reader.
it _is_ smaller. And it is _measurably_ faster on that thing I have at
home (and old p4).
-
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
