On Sun, 01 Oct 2017, William Casarin <[email protected]> wrote: > Jani Nikula <[email protected]> writes: > >> @@ -171,11 +186,22 @@ parse_option (int argc, char **argv, const >> notmuch_opt_desc_t *options, int opt_ >> if (! try->name) >> continue; >> >> - if (strncmp (arg, try->name, strlen (try->name)) != 0) >> + char next; >> + const char *value; >> + notmuch_bool_t negate = FALSE; >> + >> + if (strncmp (arg, try->name, strlen (try->name)) == 0) { >> + next = arg[strlen (try->name)]; >> + value = arg + strlen (try->name) + 1; >> + } else if (negative_arg && (try->opt_bool || try->opt_flags) && >> + strncmp (negative_arg, try->name, strlen (try->name)) == 0) { >> + next = negative_arg[strlen (try->name)]; >> + value = negative_arg + strlen (try->name) + 1; >> + /* The argument part of --no-argument matches, negate the result. */ >> + negate = TRUE; >> + } else { >> continue; >> - >> - char next = arg[strlen (try->name)]; >> - const char *value = arg + strlen(try->name) + 1; >> + } > > nit: I see strlen (try->name) computed 6 times here, any reason not to pull > this out into a variable?
I pretty much thought the change was so controversial that I wouldn't bother with that kind of fixes until we'd agreed we want this. Other than that, agreed. BR, Jani. _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
