On 2014-02-17 07:08, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 17/02/2014 05:51, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
I'm inclined to agree with this. Since the code depends on a specific
behavior of isspace which does not match what the system provided
function does I too think it would be more robust to implement our
own version of it.
I completely agree that changing this code to use its own isspace is
the right thing, it just seems a bit much for a drive-by fixed to gcc
warnings. Do either of you want to take it?
How about:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/isspace/webrev.00/webrev/
Cheers,
Mikael
