Re: [PATCH 3/3] shorten_unambiguous_ref(): avoid sscanf()

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "Eric Sunshine" <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
	孟子易 <mengziyi540841@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] shorten_unambiguous_ref(): avoid sscanf()
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 21:10:04 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqsff71plf.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+wN0agVK9ZQU/sT@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 14 Feb 2023 17:40:17 -0500")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> It does indeed. I pulled the logic from skip_prefix(), thinking that by
> relying on it I would avoid making a stupid mistake. Oh well. :)
>
> Doing it like this is much more readable:
> ...
> I'll hold on to that (plus an adjustment to the comment below to match,
> and perhaps a test for this negative-match case) for a day or so to give
> anybody else a chance to comment, and then send out a v2 tomorrow.

Thanks, and surely that is very readable.

Alternatively, I think you can just compare refname and rule until
they diverge, without doing any special casing for per-cent on the
rule side inside the loop.

If you do not find any difference, or the byte that differ is not
the per-cent at the beginning of "%.*s" on the rule side, they they
do not match.