[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] fat: Refactor shortname parsing
    "Steven J. Magnani" <> writes:

    > On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 23:36 +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
    >> "Steven J. Magnani" <> writes:
    >> > True, but with the change you suggest we lose the incrementing of 'i',
    >> > which likely would cause an infinite loop for 1:1 Unicode conversions.
    >> You meant, we just have to do
    >> if (!is_vfat)
    >> ptname[i] = ...;
    >> i++;
    >> or something? I still feel this looks better to indicate, we don't use
    >> ptname in the case of vfat.
    > I can change it, but there are other places in that function where
    > ptname is used that are not qualified with !is_vfat, so I don't know
    > whether this improves clarity or reduces it.
    > I do think fat_tolower() should not be making decisions. IMHO the
    > trigraph and a comment, perhaps before the vfat-only reassignment of
    > 'name', would be clearer.

    Hm, the primary case is vfat. fat_tolower()/hidden is required only for
    msdos, and ptname too. So, my suggestion is trying to keep vfat case
    OGAWA Hirofumi <>

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-07-02 18:01    [W:0.023 / U:1.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site