Comments on: Feedback wanted for a C function http://blog.ghcoders.net/2007/10/16/feedback-wanted-for-a-c-function/ Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:32:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jeremy Fincher http://blog.ghcoders.net/2007/10/16/feedback-wanted-for-a-c-function/#comment-16 Jeremy Fincher Tue, 13 Nov 2007 22:43:05 +0000 http://blog.ghcoders.net/2007/10/16/feedback-wanted-for-a-c-function/#comment-16 First, the function is too long. Write another function to skip leading whitespace (or, for extra credit, write a function to skip leading chars matching a certain predicate) and use that. Second, I wouldn't use strlen at all. It doesn't significantly simplify your function and it results in making two passes over the string rather than one. Instead, just use a while loop like "while (c = *s++)". You could write it in a more state machine style, if you want, but it's not necessary. First, the function is too long. Write another function to skip leading whitespace (or, for extra credit, write a function to skip leading chars matching a certain predicate) and use that.

Second, I wouldn’t use strlen at all. It doesn’t significantly simplify your function and it results in making two passes over the string rather than one. Instead, just use a while loop like “while (c = *s++)”.

You could write it in a more state machine style, if you want, but it’s not necessary.

]]> By: jamessan http://blog.ghcoders.net/2007/10/16/feedback-wanted-for-a-c-function/#comment-10 jamessan Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:59:44 +0000 http://blog.ghcoders.net/2007/10/16/feedback-wanted-for-a-c-function/#comment-10 Just as a matter of course, the first thing I'd do in such a function is: <pre> <code> if (s == NULL || strlen(s) == 0) return 0; </code> </pre> The inconsistency between your use of post-increment and pre-increment is a little odd. Other than that, it looks good. Just as a matter of course, the first thing I’d do in such a function is:


if (s == NULL || strlen(s) == 0)
    return 0;

The inconsistency between your use of post-increment and pre-increment is a little odd. Other than that, it looks good.

]]>