Re: replace strtok()
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-06-24T12:57:27Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 24.06.24 02:34, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Jun 22, 2024 at 11:48:21AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> writes: >>> On 18.06.24 13:43, Ranier Vilela wrote: >>>> I found another implementation of strsep, it seems lighter to me. >>>> I will attach it for consideration, however, I have not done any testing. >> >>> Yeah, surely there are many possible implementations. I'm thinking, >>> since we already took other str*() functions from OpenBSD, it makes >>> sense to do this here as well, so we have only one source to deal with. >> >> Why not use strpbrk? That's equally thread-safe, it's been there >> since C89, and it doesn't have the problem that you can't find out >> which of the delimiter characters was found. > > Yeah, strpbrk() has been used in the tree as far as 2003 without any > port/ implementation. The existing uses of strpbrk() are really just checking whether some characters exist in a string, more like an enhanced strchr(). I don't see any uses for tokenizing a string like strtok() or strsep() would do. I think that would look quite cumbersome. So I think a simpler and more convenient abstraction like strsep() would still be worthwhile.
Commits
-
Fix memory leaks from incorrect strsep() uses
- 4b652692e979 18.0 landed
-
Fix strsep() use for SCRAM secrets parsing
- 24a36f91e32d 18.0 landed
-
Replace remaining strtok() with strtok_r()
- 65504b747f3c 18.0 landed
-
Windows replacement for strtok_r()
- 4d130b28727c 18.0 landed
-
Replace some strtok() with strsep()
- 5d2e1cc117b3 18.0 landed
-
Add port/ replacement for strsep()
- 683be87fbba0 18.0 landed