Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:
+static inline int substrcmp(const char *string, int len, const char *match)
+{
+ int match_len = strlen(match);
+ if (match_len != len)
+ return -1;
+ return memcmp(string, match, len);
+}
Is this what we call "starts_with()" these days?
+void fsck_set_severity(struct fsck_options *options, const char *mode)
+{
+ int severity = FSCK_ERROR;
+
+ if (!options->msg_severity) {
+ int i;
+ int *msg_severity = malloc(sizeof(int) * FSCK_MSG_MAX);
xmalloc()?
Hi Junio,
On 2015-01-21 09:49, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
+static inline int substrcmp(const char *string, int len, const char *match)
+{
+ int match_len = strlen(match);
+ if (match_len != len)
+ return -1;
+ return memcmp(string, match, len);
+}
Is this what we call "starts_with()" these days?
Unfortunately not quite: It really requires the substring specified by `string` and `len` to be identical to the full `match`. For example, `substrcmp("Hello world!", 5, "Hell")` would report a failure (because the substring "Hello" is *not* matching "Hell"), while `starts_with("Hello world!", "Hell")` would obviously succeed.
quoted
+void fsck_set_severity(struct fsck_options *options, const char *mode)
+{
+ int severity = FSCK_ERROR;
+
+ if (!options->msg_severity) {
+ int i;
+ int *msg_severity = malloc(sizeof(int) * FSCK_MSG_MAX);
xmalloc()?
Absolutely! Fixed.
Thanks,
Dscho