On Sat, Jan 02, 2021 at 08:33:51PM +0000, Miod Vallat wrote:
> That code was written before inline functions were supported by
> compilers; now that they are even part of the language standard, turn
> macros into inline functions so that there is no need to document in
> comments that they will evaluate their arguments multiple times.
>
ok tb
Minor comments inline
> (one may consider switching their names to lowercase now that these are
> no longer macros.)
No opinion.
>
> Index: regex2.h
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /OpenBSD/src/lib/libc/regex/regex2.h,v
> retrieving revision 1.10
> diff -u -p -r1.10 regex2.h
> --- regex2.h 31 Dec 2020 17:20:19 -0000 1.10
> +++ regex2.h 2 Jan 2021 15:59:51 -0000
> @@ -107,10 +107,24 @@ typedef struct {
> uch mask; /* bit within array */
> uch hash; /* hash code */
> } cset;
> -/* note that CHadd and CHsub are unsafe, and CHIN doesn't yield 0/1 */
> -#define CHadd(cs, c) ((cs)->ptr[(uch)(c)] |= (cs)->mask, (cs)->hash
> += (c))
> -#define CHsub(cs, c) ((cs)->ptr[(uch)(c)] &= ~(cs)->mask, (cs)->hash
> -= (c))
> -#define CHIN(cs, c) ((cs)->ptr[(uch)(c)] & (cs)->mask)
> +
> +static inline void
> +CHadd(cset *cs, char c)
> +{
> + cs->ptr[(uch)c] |= cs->mask;
> + cs->hash += c;
> +}
I would put a blank line here
> +static inline void
> +CHsub(cset *cs, char c)
> +{
> + cs->ptr[(uch)c] &= ~cs->mask;
> + cs->hash -= c;
> +}
and here.
> +static inline uch
> +CHIN(const cset *cs, char c)
> +{
> + return cs->ptr[(uch)c] & cs->mask;
Is there a reason not to do
return (cs->ptr[(uch)c] & cs->mask) != 0;
This would allow us to get rid of the !! construct in regcomp.c
> +}
>
> /*
> * main compiled-expression structure
>
