On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 05:28:35AM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 08:33:37PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 05 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 05 2018, Eric Sunshine wrote:
>
> []
>
> > > SunCC used to be ahead of GCC & Clang when it came to certain classes of
> > > warnings, but e.g. now everything it complains about is because it
> > > doesn't understand C as well, e.g. we have quite a few compile warnings
> > > due to code like this, which it claims is unreachable (but isn't):
> > > https://github.com/git/git/blob/v2.19.0-rc2/read-cache.c#L950-L955
> >
>
> Wait a second - even if the compiler claims something (wrong)...
> there a still 1+1/2 questions from my side:
>
>
> int verify_path(const char *path, unsigned mode)
> {
> char c;
> ^
> /* Q1: should "c" be initialized like this: */
> char c = *path;
>
> if (has_dos_drive_prefix(path))
> return 0;
>
> goto inside;
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^ /* Q2: and why do we need the "goto" here ? */
> for (;;) {
> if (!c)
> return 1;
> if (is_dir_sep(c)) {
> inside:
After some re-reading,
I think that the "goto inside" was just hard to read....
Out of interest:
would the following make the compiler happy ?
diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c
index 49add63fe1..d574d58b9d 100644
--- a/read-cache.c
+++ b/read-cache.c
@@ -951,17 +951,15 @@ static int verify_dotfile(const char *rest, unsigned mode)
int verify_path(const char *path, unsigned mode)
{
- char c;
+ char c = *path ? '/' : '\0';
if (has_dos_drive_prefix(path))
return 0;
- goto inside;
for (;;) {
if (!c)
return 1;
if (is_dir_sep(c)) {
-inside:
if (protect_hfs) {
if (is_hfs_dotgit(path))
return 0;
