On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 03:10:51PM +0800, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone because len
> is easy to have typo.
I'm thinking that is exactly the easy case for compilers/semantic
checkers to verify. Now granted, GCC doesn't seem to do that by itself,
but still.
I'd buy
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:31 PM Valentin Schneider
wrote:
>
> On 09/08/2019 08:10, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> > strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone because len
> > is easy to have typo.
> > The example is the hard-coded len has counting error
> > or sizeof(const) forgets - 1.
> > So we prefer using
On 09/08/2019 08:10, Chuhong Yuan wrote:
> strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone because len
> is easy to have typo.
> The example is the hard-coded len has counting error
> or sizeof(const) forgets - 1.
> So we prefer using newly introduced str_has_prefix()
> to substitute such strncmp to make
strncmp(str, const, len) is error-prone because len
is easy to have typo.
The example is the hard-coded len has counting error
or sizeof(const) forgets - 1.
So we prefer using newly introduced str_has_prefix()
to substitute such strncmp to make code better.
Signed-off-by: Chuhong Yuan
---
4 matches
Mail list logo