Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] strbuf: introduce strbuf_split_str_without_term()

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Eric Sunshine [off-list ref] wrote:

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Karthik Nayak [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

strbuf: introduce strbuf_split_str_without_term()

s/without/omit/

quoted

The current implementation of 'strbuf_split_buf()' includes the
terminator at the end of each strbuf post splitting. Add an option
wherein we can drop the terminator if desired. In this context
introduce a wrapper function 'strbuf_split_str_without_term()' which

s/without/omit/

Oops! will change that,

quoted

splits a given string into strbufs without including the terminator.

Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak <redacted>
---

diff --git a/strbuf.c b/strbuf.c

@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ void strbuf_tolower(struct strbuf *sb)
 struct strbuf **strbuf_split_buf(const char *str, size_t slen,
-                                int terminator, int max)
+                                int terminator, int max, int omit_term)
 {
        struct strbuf **ret = NULL;
        size_t nr = 0, alloc = 0;

@@ -123,14 +123,15 @@ struct strbuf **strbuf_split_buf(const char *str, size_t slen,

        while (slen) {
                int len = slen;
+               const char *end = NULL;
                if (max <= 0 || nr + 1 < max) {
-                       const char *end = memchr(str, terminator, slen);
+                       end = memchr(str, terminator, slen);
                        if (end)
                                len = end - str + 1;
                }
                t = xmalloc(sizeof(struct strbuf));
                strbuf_init(t, len);
-               strbuf_add(t, str, len);
+               strbuf_add(t, str, len - !!end * !!omit_term);

This version of the patch with its minimal[1] change is much easier to
review for correctness than the original attempt[2].

[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/281882
[2]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/281189

quoted

                ALLOC_GROW(ret, nr + 2, alloc);
                ret[nr++] = t;
                str += len;

diff --git a/strbuf.h b/strbuf.h
index 6ae7a72..a865a74 100644
--- a/strbuf.h
+++ b/strbuf.h

@@ -450,11 +450,12 @@ static inline int strbuf_strip_suffix(struct strbuf *sb, const char *suffix)
 /**
  * Split str (of length slen) at the specified terminator character.
  * Return a null-terminated array of pointers to strbuf objects
- * holding the substrings.  The substrings include the terminator,
- * except for the last substring, which might be unterminated if the
- * original string did not end with a terminator.  If max is positive,
- * then split the string into at most max substrings (with the last
- * substring containing everything following the (max-1)th terminator
+ * holding the substrings.  The substrings include the terminator if
+ * the value of omit_term is '0' else the terminator is excluded.  The

Perhaps just say "if omit_term is false" rather than "if the value of ... is 0".

quoted

+ * last substring, might be unterminated if the original string did
+ * not end with a terminator.  If max is positive, then split the

This bit about the last substring is perhaps too disconnected from the
previous sentence. What if you re-word the entire thing something like
this:

    If omit_term is true, the terminator will be stripped from all
    substrings. Otherwise, substrings will include the terminator,
    except for the final substring, if the original string lacked a
    terminator.

Im quite bad at this, thanks :)

quoted

This version of the patch with its minimal[1] change is much easier to
review for correctness than the original attempt[2].

Perhaps worthy of a Helped-by:?

Definitely! Sorry for not including that, slipped off my mind.

-- 
Regards,
Karthik Nayak