Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Add a new function child_path.

[Simon Marchi <simark at simark dot ca>]

On 2019-02-12 11:52, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 2/11/19 6:46 PM, Simon Marchi wrote:
> > On 2019-02-11 9:43 p.m., Simon Marchi wrote:
> > > On 2019-01-28 3:47 p.m., John Baldwin wrote:
> > > > child_path returns a pointer to the first component in a child path
> > > > that comes after a parent path.  This does not depend on trying to
> > > > stat() the paths since they may describe remote paths but instead
> > > > relies on filename parsing.  The function requires that the child 
> > > > path
> > > > describe a filename that contains at least one component below the
> > > > parent path and returns a pointer to the first component.
> > > >
> > > > gdb/ChangeLog:
> > > >
> > > > 	* Makefile.in (SUBDIR_UNITTESTS_SRCS): Add
> > > > 	unittests/child-path-selftests.c.
> > > > 	* common/pathstuff.c (child_path): New function.
> > > > 	* common/pathstuff.h (child_path): New prototype.
> > > > 	* unittests/child-path-selftests.c: New file.
> > >
> > > Thanks, this LGTM.  Just minor comments below.
> >
> > Oh, and maybe name the function is_child_path or child_path_p?
>
> I started with that name in an earlier version when it returned a 
> boolean,
> but renamed it when I found that I needed it to return the trailing 
> portion
> of the child pathname to avoid duplicating logic in the caller.  Maybe
> "get_child_path" would be better?

Ah you're right, it doesn't make sense if the function doesn't return a 
bool.  What you have is fine with me.

Simon