On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 12:57:09PM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 06:08:37AM +0200, Rene Kita wrote:
> > On Thu, May 07, 2026 at 12:02:08PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> > > Updated patch attached. I think I addressed everything you mentioned.
> > > Tests still pass.
>
> Yes, it did, thank you for your work, Derek.
>
> > A little nitpicking below.
>
> [...]
>
> (In defense of Derek's commenting, I was the one who encouraged more
> verboseness and examples)
>
> > If we don't care about adding empty strings we could just do (untested):
> > #v+
> > void mutt_buffer_concat_path(BUFFER *d, const char *dir, const char *fname)
> > {
> > mutt_buffer_clear(d);
> > mutt_buffer_addstr(d, dir);
> >
> > if (*dir && dir[strlen(dir)-1 != '/')
> > mutt_buffer_addch(d, '/');
> > while (*fname && *fname == '/') fname++;
> > mutt_buffer_addstr(d, fname);
> > }
> > #v-
>
> I like this version (subject to testing).
>
> However, the last, simplest version that Alex posted also bears note. I'm
> adding more context lines (breaking the patch) to make the whole thing
> clearer:
>
> diff --git i/muttlib.c w/muttlib.c
> index 59a48378..a9fe8779 100644
> --- i/muttlib.c
> +++ w/muttlib.c
> @@ -1394,6 +1394,8 @@ void mutt_buffer_concat_path(BUFFER *d, const char*dir,
> const char *fname)
> {
> const char *fmt = "%s/%s";
>
> if (!*fname || (*dir && dir[strlen(dir)-1] == '/'))
> fmt = "%s%s";
>
> + fname += strspn(fname, "/");
> +
> mutt_buffer_printf(d, fmt, dir, fname);
> }
>
> I think this is basically equivalent to what you posted, Rene.
Yes.
strspn is one of those function I can't get into my head, that's why I
always end with a loop. :-) I should really try to remember it.
> The only tests that were failing in Derek's list where those in which fname
> started with '/'. So it clearly fixes that bug.
>
> Fortunately I don't have to choose. I had forgotten that there is another
> version of the function in lib.c: mutt_concat_path(). It's not called, but
> it should be fixed too. And Alex's one-line fix applies easily there.
>
> So I'd like to apply Rene's version to the buffer version, swapping in the
> "fname += strspn(fname, "/");" in place of the while loop. And Alex's
> version to the mutt_concat_path() (non-buffer) version.
>
> Does that sound good to everyone?
I usually prefer the changes with less churn, but OTOH I find that
'if (!*fname' part a bit confusing and my version more readable (of
course, as I wrote it :-D).
Either way, OK.
