On 08.07.24 07:45, David Steele wrote:
> On 6/24/24 19:57, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> 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.
>
> I agree that using strsep() in these cases seems more natural. Since
> this patch provides a default implementation compatibility does not seem
> like a big issue.
>
> I've also reviewed the rest of the patch and it looks good to me.
This has been committed. Thanks.