On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Brandon Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> +void string_list_remove(struct string_list *list, const char *string,
> + int free_util)
> +{
> + int exact_match;
> + int i = get_entry_index(list, string, &exact_match);
> +
> + if (exact_match) {
> + if (list->strdup_strings)
> + free(list->items[i].string);
> + if (free_util)
> + free(list->items[i].util);
> +
> + list->nr--;
> + memmove(list->items + i, list->items + i + 1,
> + (list->nr - i) * sizeof(struct string_list_item));
> + }
Looks correct. I shortly wondered if we'd have any value in returing
`exact_match`, as that may save the caller some code, as I imagine the
caller to be:
if (!string_list_has_string(&list, string))
die("BUG: ...");
string_list_remove(&list, string, 0);
which could be simplified if we had the exact_match returned, i.e.
the string_list_remove returns the implicit string_list_has_string.
> /*
> + * Removes the given string from the sorted list.
What happens when the string is not found?
> + */
> +void string_list_remove(struct string_list *list, const char *string, int
> free_util);
How much do we care about (eventual) consistency? ;)
i.e. mark it extern ?
Thanks,
Stefan