Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> writes:
I really liked the fact (not necessarily the way, though) this
shortens the callers.
Wouldn't this be easier to read?
if (count < 0)
for (count = 0; argv[count]; count++)
; /* just counting */
This confused me quite a bit. Wouldn't it be simpler to special
case the count==0 case and return xcalloc(1,1) here (this would
allow you to lose "if (!count)" later as well)?
(style)
if (i)
*to++ = ' ';
I do not think there is anything wrong with this function
per-se, but...
this feels wrong. What happens when the original argv had
a per-cent in it?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html