On Sunday 2009-11-08 17:52, André Goddard Rosa wrote:
>Hi, James!
>
>On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:05 PM, James Bottomley
><[email protected]> wrote:
>> Before we embark on something as massive as this, could we take a step
>> back. I agree that if I were coming up with the strstip() interface
>> today I probably wouldn't have given it two overloaded uses.
>>
>> However, I think the function, in spite of this minor issue, is very
>> usable. I still don't understand why people thought adding a
>> __must_check, which is what damaged one of the overloaded uses, is a
>> good idea.
>
>Differently of "static void strip(char *str)"@scripts/kconfig/conf.c ,
>this function
>does not moves the characters to the beginning of the string, so that if that
>string is going to be reused it should refer to the newly returned string start.
>
>I've changed it to remove the const and return a "char *".
>
>Do you think __must_check is not needed as well?
If you called strstrip, and not use its result, what good would that
do besides being effectively a strrtrim? __must_check is a good thing IMO.