On Tue, 08 May 2018 16:49:12 +0200, Alexey Dokuchaev <da...@freebsd.org>
wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 09:36:21AM -0500, Kyle Evans wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev <da...@freebsd.org>
wrote:
>>
>> - if ((f = fopen(fn, "r")) == NULL)
>> + if (strcmp(fn, "-") == 0)
>> + f = stdin;
>
> This makes sense: when `fn' is "-", `f' is stdin.
>
>> - fclose(f);
>> + if (strcmp(fn, "-") != 0)
>> + fclose(f);
>
> But not this one: why are you checking `fn' again? Shouldn't you
> fclose(f) if it's not stdin?
>
> if (f != stdin)
> fclose(f);
>
You say potato, I say potato. =) In this case, it's low overhead in a
not particularly performance critical bit and drawing a connection
between this and the opening of 'f' above in an extremely obvious way.
Well, I'm not worried about the overhead or performance issues, they are
negligible. I just find second strcmp(fn, "-") to be semantically wrong
(and that's why you need implicit "there's only one way to get stdin
here"
assert). You assign `f' to stdin based on `fn' being "-", but you
fclose(f) when it's not stdin; the value of `fn' is irrelevant this time.
As a nice bonus, you only spell strcmp(fn, "-") once and do not need to
implicitly assert that there's only one way to get stdin here.
This also might get ripped out soon -- we'll see how things go.
I see, understood.
./danfe
What is the result of "-f /dev/stdin"? Of does that fopen return a
different filedesc?
Ronald.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
