Re: [PATCH 11/13] strbuf: add strbuf_add*_urlencode

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:26:20AM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+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;
+	}

[...]
Sorry for my bikeshedding, but I'd paint it like this:

	return !!strchr("!*'();:@&=+$,/?#[]", ch);

I was always under the impression that computed jumps via "switch" would
out-perform even an optimized strchr. Of course, I never tested. And I
doubt performance is even relevant here, and I admit I don't care overly
much. I find them both equally readable.

I'm going to leave it as-is unless somebody else wants to say "I
strongly prefer version X".

I find the switch/case one much easier to read and count, especially since
all the choices are essentially line-noise characters.

Just make sure you indent it correctly ;-)