DJ Bernstein's str library

[Peter Davies]

Hi all,

Plagued by the (to me) non-obvious functionality of DJB's str.h library, I
started looking at the source and what I saw took a while to make sense.

Each function runs an infinite loop, which iterates though a char* - in
order to search for needles or calculate a string length or whatever. What
got me was that each of the infinite loops held 4 identical statements:

for (;;) {
if (!*t) break; if (*t == ch) break; ++t;
if (!*t) break; if (*t == ch) break; ++t;
if (!*t) break; if (*t == ch) break; ++t;
if (!*t) break; if (*t == ch) break; ++t;
}
(in str_chr.c) and

for (;;) {
if (!*t) return t - s; ++t;
if (!*t) return t - s; ++t;
if (!*t) return t - s; ++t;
if (!*t) return t - s; ++t;
}
(in str_len.c)

Does anyone have any ideas as to why this is done? All I can think of is
that 4 chars=32bits and that nicely fills a register.

--
Peter Davies

[Mark McIntyre]

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:35:43 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Netocrat
<ne******@dodo. com.au> wrote:

Jordan Abel : Any content following '-- ' is required to be a signature.
Mark McIntyre: Any content following '-- ' is defined to be a signature.

The egg has wings.
Implicit meaning and convention collide in ambiguity.

:-)
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt >

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Jordan Abel]

On 2005-10-30, Mark McIntyre <ma**********@s pamcop.net> wrote:

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:35:43 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Netocrat
<ne******@dodo. com.au> wrote:

Jordan Abel : Any content following '-- ' is required to be a signature.
Mark McIntyre: Any content following '-- ' is defined to be a signature. Also, "Any signature must be preceded by '-- '" vs "Any text not
preceded by '-- ' is not a signature"
The egg has wings.
Implicit meaning and convention collide in ambiguity.

:-)

I've already conceded that it's not worth fighting over and never
really was in the first place. Sorry for dragging it out so long

--
I still think you're wrong, though.

[Default User]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Jordan Abel said:

I screwed up and i'm sorry.

Brian - that seems pretty unequivocal to me. How about some grace here?

That's fine. I'll undo things next week and reply more directly to
Jordan then.

Brian