[Ovirt-devel] Re: ovirt-listen-awake

[Chris Lalancette]

Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Please pardon my newbieness; I'm trying to understand what's what in ovirt (did
> not get very far yet), and stumbled upon this:

No problem, happy to help...

> 
> commit f393d38599283676fbd33c81783fd7164faa4251
> Author: Dan Kenigsberg <danken at qumranet.com>
> Date:   Tue Oct 14 12:14:03 2008 +0200
> 
>     ovirt-listen-awake: what's the point of streq?
> 
> diff --git a/ovirt-listen-awake/ovirt-listen-awake.c b/ovirt-listen-awake/ovirt-listen-awake.c
> index 7ecd0a7..b00a54d 100644
> --- a/ovirt-listen-awake/ovirt-listen-awake.c
> +++ b/ovirt-listen-awake/ovirt-listen-awake.c
> @@ -37,14 +37,7 @@
>  
>  static int streq(char *first, char *second)
>  {
> -  int first_len, second_len;
> -
> -  first_len = strlen(first);
> -  second_len = strlen(second);
> -
> -  if (first_len == second_len && strncmp(first, second, first_len) == 0)
> -    return 1;
> -  return 0;
> +  return !strcmp(first, second);
>  }

Heh.  Well, the idea was that I wanted to be a little more defensive, so that
"IDENTIFY" != "IDENTIFYFOO" (or whatever).  I could have sworn I've run into
bugs doing that in the past, but a quick test shows that strcmp() properly
returns failure in that case.

Ah, now I remember.  I was taught always to use strncmp(), and just doing
strncmp(first, second, strlen(first)) runs into the bug I was trying to avoid.
In any case, not a big deal either way; it's not performance critical in the
least, but I guess your version is a little easier to understand.  If we are
going to do it, we can just remove the streq function entirely, since it doesn't
really serve any purpose then.

By the way, you can send this stuff to ovirt-devel; I've added that as a CC here.

-- 
Chris Lalancette