From: Miguel F. <mfr...@gm...> - 2004-07-23 17:19:03
|
Hi Michael, On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 15:51:51 +0200, Michael Roitzsch <mr...@us...> wrote: > This looks very similar to what I thought about. I remember having seen these > functions before, but it seems I did not understood their importance. I think > most of xine's string handling should be ported to use these functions. > Question is, how should we proceed? > > a) Drop reviewing all string functions and port things right away. > b) Complete the review, leaving the ugly C-string functions and fixed-size > arrays in there and port things slowly over time. > > What do you think? I think that you can use the review as an exercise to introduce usage of these functions all around. But this is really up to you, imo. You are the one working on it, so do it the way you think it is more fun ;-) > Btw, part of my ignorance concerning these functions might be due to their > name. When I hear "buffer" in xine, I think of something else. Maybe > xine_array_* is a better name? well, actually they should have been renamed to _x_* quite some time ago. i guess they were just forgotten. imho, _x_safe_* would be better than array or buffer. regards, Miguel |