Brandon Casey <> writes:

> On 2/12/2013 11:36 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Brandon Casey <> writes:
>>>>> + return len > strlen(cherry_picked_prefix) + 1 &&
>>>>> +         !prefixcmp(buf, cherry_picked_prefix) && buf[len - 1] == ')';
>>>>> +}
>>>> Does the first "is it longer than the prefix?" check matter?  If it
>>>> is not, prefixcmp() would not match anyway, no?
>>> Probably not in practice, but technically we should only be accessing
>>> len characters in buf even though buf may be longer than len.  So the
>>> check is just making sure the function doesn't access chars it's not
>>> supposed to.
>> Sorry, I do not follow.  Isn't caller's buf terminated with LF at buf[len],
>> which would never match cherry_picked_prefix even if len is shorter
>> than the prefix?
> Heh, I almost pointed that out in my reply.  Yes, buf will be terminated
> with LF at buf[len].  And yes, that means that we will never get a false
> positive from prefixcmp even if the comparison overruns buf+len while
> doing its comparison.  That's why the check doesn't matter in practice,
> i.e. based on the way that is_cherry_picked_from_line is being called
> right now and the content of cherry_picked_prefix.
> But, hasn't is_cherry_picked_from_line entered into a contract with the
> caller and said "I will not access more than len characters"?
> It's ok with me if you think it reads better without the check.

As Jonathan says, if you rewrite it to

        return buf[len - 1] == ')' && !prefixcmp(buf, cherry_picked_prefix);

then the code can keep its promise without the length check, because
it knows there is no ')' in cherry-picked-prefix, and it also knows
prefixcmp() stops at the first difference.

It is not a huge deal; I was primarily reacting to the ugly multi-line
boolean expresion that is not inside a pair of parentheses (and because
this is a "return" statement, there is no good reason to have parentheses
except that this is a multi-line expression), which looked odd.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to