Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: getline

[Paul Eggert]

Simon Josefsson <address@hidden> writes:

> Comments on the glibc patch below?  I didn't compile the code, if
> someone have more patience with glibc builds to test it, that would
> be useful.

Wow, you were more ambitious that I thought were going to be.  I
assumed that you'd just slide getndelim2 into glibc as a hidden
function, and rewrite getdelim and getline to use it, without any real
performance hit (perhaps using conditional compilation to achieve this
feat).  Perhaps I didn't think things through carefully enough?

I doubt whether it's worth making getndelim2 a full-fledged glibc
function.  It's fairly specialized.  It's used only by "cut".

> Is GETNLINE_NO_LIMIT a good name?

It's not a name that stdio.h should export, no.  I'd just tell people
to use ((size_t) -1) myself; that's the C tradition.

> I don't understand why glibc use _IO_ssize_t instead of ssize_t, nor
> why variable names are prefixed with __ in headers, but I followed the
> existing style.

It's to avoid namespace collision with users' macro names.