From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <git-owner@vger.kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
	shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5F4E1FF72
	for <e@80x24.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 05:32:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751375AbdJSFcs (ORCPT <rfc822;e@80x24.org>);
        Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:32:48 -0400
Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:57292 "HELO cloud.peff.net"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
        id S1751054AbdJSFcs (ORCPT <rfc822;git@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:32:48 -0400
Received: (qmail 2193 invoked by uid 109); 19 Oct 2017 05:32:48 -0000
Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2)
 by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 05:32:48 +0000
Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none
Received: (qmail 6374 invoked by uid 111); 19 Oct 2017 05:32:52 -0000
Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7)
 by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:32:52 -0400
Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none
Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:32:45 -0400
Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 01:32:45 -0400
From:   Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To:     Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc:     Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>, git@vger.kernel.org,
        orgads@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff.c: increment buffer pointer in all code path
Message-ID: <20171019053245.g4n32ebnyi4xmbwi@sigill.intra.peff.net>
References: <20171012200536.m6oz4zrjcze3yw4i@sigill.intra.peff.net>
 <20171012233322.31203-1-sbeller@google.com>
 <20171013001837.43nx5paeqisbrflq@sigill.intra.peff.net>
 <20171013002057.froqi54olmhmah6b@sigill.intra.peff.net>
 <20171019050459.p2cx63yrxfwq4ta3@sigill.intra.peff.net>
 <20171019052457.gqenoshgyjcw53tb@sigill.intra.peff.net>
 <xmqqzi8niu1r.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
 <xmqqvajbityj.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <xmqqvajbityj.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <git.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 02:32:04PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> > Yeah I am not sure if I like this comparison at the beginning of the
> > function:
> >
> >         static int next_byte(const char **cp, const char **endp,
> >                              const struct diff_options *diffopt)
> >         {
> >                 int retval;
> >
> >                 if (*cp > *endp)
> >                         return -1;
> >
> > but it says endp _is_ part of valid input, contrary to my intuition.
> >
> > And your change to the initialization of ae/be in moved_entry_cmp()
> > makes it consistent with it, I think.
> >
> > But doesn't it mean ae computation in get_string_hash() also needs a
> > massaging?
> 
> Ah, forget the last two lines.  You do do the massaging in your
> patch.

I was just replying so. :)

> My preference actually is to fix next_byte to follow the usual "when
> we end, it points one past the valid region", though.

Yeah, I think that is my preference, too.

-Peff