Re: [PATCH 11/13] strbuf: add strbuf_add*_urlencode
flat view
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:52:32
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This just follows the rfc3986 rules for percent-encoding url data into a strbuf. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <redacted> --- strbuf.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ strbuf.h | 5 +++++ 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)diff --git a/strbuf.c b/strbuf.c index 3ad2cc0..60e5e59 100644 --- a/strbuf.c +++ b/strbuf.c@@ -397,3 +397,40 @@ int strbuf_read_file(struct strbuf *sb, const char *path, size_t hint) return len; } + +static int is_rfc3986_reserved(char ch) +{ + switch (ch) { + case '!': case '*': case '\'': case '(': case ')': case ';': + case ':': case '@': case '&': case '=': case '+': case '$': + case ',': case '/': case '?': case '#': case '[': case ']': + return 1; + } + return 0; +}
Part of me wonders if we still have extra bits in sane_ctype[] array but that one is cumbersome to update, and the above should be easier to read and maintain.
+void strbuf_add_urlencode(struct strbuf *sb, const char *s, size_t len, + int reserved)
Does "reserved" parameter mean "must-encode-reserved", or "may-encode-reserved" (the latter would be more like "if set to 0, per-cent encoding the result would be an error")?