[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: strcmp change?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: strcmp change? |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Nov 2005 14:12:02 -0500 |
On 6-Nov-2005, Søren Hauberg wrote:
| søn, 06 11 2005 kl. 09:58 -0500, skrev John W. Eaton:
| > So probably the new function needs a bit more work. It would be
| > useful if someone would suggest a patch.
| A quick-and-dirty hack (that appears to work just fine) is to change the
| the first line of the function body from
|
| octave_value retval;
|
| to
|
| octave_value retval = false;
OK, I made a similar change. The overall structure of strcmp was
if (args.length () == 2)
{
...
if (s1_string && s2_string)
{
...
}
else if ((s1_string && s2_cell) || (s1_cell && s2_string))
{
...
}
else if (s1_cell && s2_cell)
{
...
}
}
else
print_usage ("strcmp");
I changed it to
if (args.length () == 2)
{
...
if (s1_string && s2_string)
{
...
}
else if ((s1_string && s2_cell) || (s1_cell && s2_string))
{
...
}
else if (s1_cell && s2_cell)
{
...
}
else
retval = false;
}
else
print_usage ("strcmp");
I think your change had the same effect, but I prefer adding the else
clause because it seems to describe more explicitly what is happening.
Thanks,
jwe
-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------