On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 04:44:44PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 08:41:20AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

quoted

quoted

@@ -72,11 +73,14 @@ static const char *unquote_comment(struct strbuf *outbuf, const char *in)
 				take_next_literally = 1;
 				continue;
 			case '(':
-				in = unquote_comment(outbuf, in);
+				strbuf_addch(outbuf, '(');
+				depth++;
 				continue;
 			case ')':
 				strbuf_addch(outbuf, ')');
-				return in;
+				if (!--depth)
+					return in;
+				continue;
 			}
 		}
 

I doubt it's a big deal either way, but if it's that easy to do it might
be worth it.

Isn't this only protecting against unbalanced braces? That might be a
sensible check to do regardless, but does it protect against recursion
blowing the stack if you just happen to have many opening braces?

Might be I'm missing something.

It protects against recrusion blowing the stack because it removes the
recursive call to unquote_comment(). ;)

Doh. Of course it does, I completely missed the removals.

The "depth" stuff is there because without recursion, we have to know
when we've hit the correct closing paren (as opposed to an embedded
one).

Yes, makes sense now. The patches look good to me, thanks!

Patrick