On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 05:53:05PM +0200, René Scharfe wrote: > > Obviously one solution is to add the "runs" option to all variants. But > > I'd be hesitant to burden existing callers. So I'd propose one of: > > > > 1. Make your _1() function public, with a name like _with_options() or > > something (though the function name is sadly already quite long). > > Leave string_list_split_in_place() as a wrapper that behaves as > > now, and have the few new callers use the with_options() variant. > > > > 2. Don't bother implementing the "runs" version. The only users would > > be test programs, and nobody cares much either way for their cases. > > Document in the commit message (and possibly above the function) > > that this isn't a strict replacement for strtok(). That would > > hopefully be enough for a potential caller to think about the > > behavior, and we can add "runs" if and when somebody actually wants > > it. > > You can call string_list_remove_empty_items() to get rid of empty > strings. And if the single-char version calls a multi-char version > under the hood then its only advantage is backward compatibility -- but > converting all callers isn't that hard. So the only string_list split > function version you really need accepts multiple delimiters and > preserves empty items and can be called string_list_split_in_place(). Ooh, I like that. I didn't think of processing after the fact. And indeed, we have several spots already that do the split/remove_empty pair. And yes, it looks like there are only 7 callers which would need a trivial update if we just switched to the multi-char version. That's very compelling. -Peff
