On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:36:37AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Yes, and that would be fine with me (I actually wrote strbuf_tolower for
> > my own use, and _then_ realized that we already had such a thing that
> > could be replaced).
> Do we forbid that sb->buf[x] for some x < sb->len to be NUL, and if
> there is such a byte we stop running tolower() on the remainder?
Christian brought this up elsewhere, and I agree it's probably better to
work over the whole buffer, NULs included. I'm happy to re-roll (or you
can just pick up the version of the patch in this thread), but I think
the bigger question is: is this refactor worth doing, since there is
only one caller?
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