On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 09:50:41PM +0000, Alex Riesen wrote: > Pierre Habouzit, Sun, Oct 07, 2007 18:52:18 +0200: > > Though, those are both things that I find ugly to "know" in convert.c. > > How things are allocated in strbufs is one of the few things we don't > > want to assume anywhere outside of the strbuf module. > > src is outside of strbuf scope. It is not internal to struct strbuf. > The caller must already know if it is inside of the given strbuf > instance. > > need_realloc is covered by make_room, isn't it? Internally yes, but make_room may move the buffer, if that happens, there is nothing we can do, in the case where we point inside (or at the begining of - fwiw it's the same here) the buffer > I'd suggest just fix the caller, it is simple in convert.c: just use > ret, which contains exactly this information. If you insist on editing > in-place, which makes your routines really need the in-placeability > informaion. Just give it to them, better explicitely. All of this > makes the routines very convert.c specific, which is the reason why I > argument to have them just there and nowhere else. > > Alternatively, one can memdup ->buf (as it is the input for next > filter) every time a filter modifies it (which is safe, but simple, > slow, requires memory, and may fragment heap): This is exactly what we are trying to avoid with the current form. Given how you try to micro-optimize strbuf_cmp I'm a bit lost here… -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpnHgsAud8yl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
