Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch - Mailing list pgsql-committers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch
Date
Msg-id 4803.1099285305@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-committers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> !     if (strlen(nodir_name) > sizeof(EXE) - 1 &&
> !         pg_strcasecmp(nodir_name + strlen(nodir_name)-sizeof(EXE)-1, EXE) == 0)

This is clearer than "4"?

If there were any remote chance that Microsoft would invent some new,
different-length spelling of the ".exe" suffix in the foreseeable
future, I might agree that this was good code.  As is, it looks like
unhelpful obscurantism, because it requires a very close reading of the
details of the C spec to confirm that it is correct and not wrong.

Code that looks wrong on its face is not an improvement over code that
is readable but doesn't cover changes that won't ever happen.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-committers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Clarify coding of .exe patch