changes to compare_string_array

[Alastor Santamaria]

hello


> The voices in your head are wrong in this case.


lol lol lol


>
> Many things return -1 to mean "it didn't work".  open() returns -1 if it
> couldn't open, chdir(), chmod(), chown(), accept(), access(), fcntl(),
> getpgrp(), sprintf()...


just because everybody does it the A way, don't mean there's no better B
way.


> In C, array indexes count up from 0.  You'd rather break the meaning of
> array


so? opengl does it also.

indexes on success than go with the common practice of using -1 as an error
> value.  I don't agree.
>
> > and some applets could benefit two.
>
> Define "benefit".


size improvements, look at the comments in previous message, is not a lot
but something is better than nothing, if you think it's not worth it, or it
makes the code less readable or uglier it's ok by me, I was just asking if
it was good or bad

You seem to have listed where this was used.  At a glance, I dunno if the
> code
> you showed was the old code or your suggested changes,


both, the old code and the changes inside c++ comments


and beyond a glance I
> don't care.
>
> > well, what do you think?
>
> Horrible idea.


fine, I'm sure you know more than I do, but still, I must ask why is it so
horrible.

best regards, Alastor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/attachments/20060903/c077dc0c/attachment.htm