On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:36:37AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Yes, and that would be fine with me (I actually wrote strbuf_tolower for > > my own use, and _then_ realized that we already had such a thing that > > could be replaced). > > Do we forbid that sb->buf[x] for some x < sb->len to be NUL, and if > there is such a byte we stop running tolower() on the remainder?
Christian brought this up elsewhere, and I agree it's probably better to work over the whole buffer, NULs included. I'm happy to re-roll (or you can just pick up the version of the patch in this thread), but I think the bigger question is: is this refactor worth doing, since there is only one caller? -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
