Re: [xml] Why the strncasecmp() avoidance?

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Daniel Veillard (Daniel.Veillard@w3.org)
Date: Fri Sep 22 2000 - 13:05:53 EDT

On Fri, Sep 22, 2000 at 04:48:13PM +0000, Bjorn Reese wrote:
>
> Wayne Davison wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> > > I see no problem if you provide xmlStrncasecmp(), yes go ahead !
>
> May I suggest adding xmlStrEqual(), which would be equivalent to
> xmlStrcasecmp()==0, and use this instead (and perhaps xmlStrEqualMax()
> instead of xmlStrncasecmp()==0).

  Well there is at least 2 good reasons to stick with the existing names:
    - they are "standard" i.e. their semantic is well known, the
      semantic of the libxml UTF8 string operations matches the one
      from strings.h
    - xmlStrncasecmp is not (!xmlStrEqual()), the return value
      is useful in the sense it allows for example to sort string
      objects.

  So I'm not very found of xmlStrEqual, even if I recognize it may be
slightly simpler for a beginner. Having to learn a new semantic when
using a new package is on the long run a very consuming operation.
Duplicating the functions means a bit more code bloat too :-\

Daniel 

-- 
Daniel.Veillard@w3.org | W3C, INRIA Rhone-Alpes  | Today's Bookmarks :
Tel : +33 476 615 257  | 655, avenue de l'Europe | Linux XML libxml WWW
Fax : +33 476 615 207  | 38330 Montbonnot FRANCE | Gnome rpm2html rpmfind
 http://www.w3.org/People/all#veillard%40w3.org  | RPM badminton Kaffe
----
Message from the list xml@rpmfind.net
Archived at : http://xmlsoft.org/messages/
to unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe xml" | mail  majordomo@rpmfind.net

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 22 2000 - 13:43:20 EDT