Thanks for the feedback,
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> Why is this an improvement? Do you expect this function to be called
> often for empty lines (as opposed, for example, to lines consisting
> solely of whitespace characters)?
Yes, you are probably right, we are not gonna get much (if any)
completely empty lines
> The comment just above this change gives a justification for putting an
> "if" statement surrounding the "while" statements. Do you think the
> comment's argument is incorrect? If so, please explain why, and remove
> or change the comment.
I see what I did wrong. I thought since that the if-condition is double checked
(from the while clause) so I removed it.
Also this lead me to see that since the while clause is now unconditioned, there
is no point of it being replicated exactly the same above, so I
removed that too. =(
I'm trying to find other inefficiencies/irregularities on that
function. I'm currently
thinking on merging the first checks with a call to iswspace() or
Also thanks for clarifying the way patches/mails work.
papanikge's surrogate email.
I may reply back.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html