Hello Justin,
About this v4.
It applies cleanly.
I'm trying to think about how to get rid of the strange structure and
hacks, and the arbitrary looking size 2 array.
Also the recursion is one step, but I'm not sure why, ISTM it could/should
go on always?
Maybe the recursive implementation was not such a good idea, if I
suggested it is because I did not noticed the "return next" re-entrant
stuff, shame on me.
Looking at the code, ISTM that relying on a stack/list would be much
cleaner and easier to understand. The code could look like:
ls_func()
if (first_time)
initialize description
set next directory to visit
while (1)
if next directory
init/push next directory to visit as current
read current directory
if emty
pop/close current directory
elif is_a_dir and recursion allowed
set next directory to visit
else ...
return next tuple
cleanup
The point is to avoid a hack around the directory_fctx array, to have only
one place to push/init a new directory (i.e. call AllocateDir and play
around with the memory context) instead of two, and to allow deeper
recursion if useful.
Details : snprintf return is not checked. Maybe it should say why an
overflow cannot occur.
"bool nulls[3] = { 0,};" -> "bool nulls[3} = { false, false, false };"?
--
Fabien.
