On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 01:17:34AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> @@ -118,7 +119,7 @@ static int get_value(config_fn_t fn, char *name, unsigned int len)
> /* Get the full name */
> for (;;) {
> c = get_next_char();
> - if (c == EOF)
> + if (config_file_eof)
> break;
> if (!iskeychar(c))
> break;
> @@ -182,7 +183,7 @@ static int get_base_var(char *name)
>
> for (;;) {
> int c = get_next_char();
> - if (c == EOF)
> + if (config_file_eof)
> return -1;
> if (c == ']')
> return baselen;
In these two hunks, we now check the eof flag correctly, which follows
through on the intent of the original code. But if you look carefully at
get_next_char(), it _never_ returns EOF in the first place; it replaces
it with '\n' and sets an external flag. So this 'if' branch was never
reached, but happened to work because the returned newline triggers a
similar effect.
By actually looking at the flag, I am implementing the original intent,
but it is a potential behavior change (I don't _think_ it should matter,
and it passes all of the config tests, but I haven't looked carefully at
all the ramifications). So it might be simpler yet to just eliminate
that conditional return.
-Peff
-
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
