Re: [RFC] Time to talk about StringNG merge again?

On 9/07/2013 8:16 p.m., Kinkie wrote:
>>>> Also, I suggest splitting this into two methods, one with a required
>>>> (first?) SBufCaseSensitive parameter and one without it. This will allow
>>>> callers to specify n without specifying isCaseSensitive and vice versa.
>>>> The shorter, inlined method will simply call the longer one with
>>>> caseSensitive, of course, so the implementation will not require more
>>>> code or performance overhead.
>>> Ok. I'm calling the two shorthand versions cmp and casecmp respectively
>>> (please let me know if you'd prefer the naming-convention compliant
>>> caseCmp instead)
>> Please. We need semantic similarity to std::string not symbolic.
> I take this as a "please yes".

Correct. Sorry for not being clear.

>
>>
>>> Code is as before at lp:~squid/squid/stringng-cherrypick, ready and in
>>> sync with trunk.
>>> test-suite runs OK on eu and ubuntu raring.
>>>
>>> I'll be on holiday in a couple of days for a couple of weeks.
> In the meantime, I've found quite a few issues with \0-cleanliness and
> parameter auto-promotion; I've also noticed that I've messed up the
> commits crossing things with an older branch (where things were
> silently failing as it didn't contain Alex' extensive unit tests).,
>
> I'll have to tidy things up, current status is "not done" :(

How long is that going to take do you think?
Anything I can do to it while you are on holiday?

Amos
Received on Thu Jul 18 2013 - 04:28:26 MDT