probably just because i'm used to memcpy; I thing strndup will check
for \0 while copying which we don't need to since we know the length?
We're going to continue to have a difference of opinion on this. I still
prefer readability and maintainability over shaving off a handful of cpu
Fr Apr 30 2010 09:43:39 EDT von IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored Betreff: Re: Citadel commit log: revision 8546
probably just because i'm used to memcpy; I thing strndup will check for \0 while copying which we don't need to since we know the length?
We're going to continue to have a
Let's not mess with it yet -- the module is not finished. The reason I'm
maintaining this xmpp mortuary is because when a Jabber client logs in,
the first thing we have to do is flush out all of the roster entries that
existed in all previous sessions. Stupidly, XMPP doesn't have a way to tell
2. Delete (from the hash table) any buddies who happen to be online *now*
Heh, Perfect! we just implemented Deleting ;-)
Maybe we need to do this with a Hashkey now too.
So there wasn't a Delete operation at the time I started writing this? Oops
:)
At the moment, the key and value are both the full address. If you want
to change it to a hash later, that's fine, but please let me finish the
application
logic first.
Ah, you found my bug and fixed it already? Thanks!
Ok, I see that. When you call Put() you're transferring control of the memory
to the hash table; it doesn't copy it over.
But why did you fix it the long way instead of just calling strdup() ?
