Re: Circlemud design issues

From: George (greerga@CIRCLEMUD.ORG)
Date: 04/24/98

On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, James Turner wrote:

>skip_spaces would work fine.  Personally I don't like skip spaces
>much; it's ugly code.  Heh, it is one of the few functions that would
>look better as a macro ;) (the isspace would ensure type safety).
>Skip spaces would work just as well though.  Doesn't much matter
>either way.
>#define skip_spaces(s) while(*(s) && isspace(*s)) (s)++

void skip_spaces(char **string)
  for (; **string && isspace(**string); (*string)++);

Could become:
  while (**string && isspace(**string)) (*string)++;

I suppose it's that way because it is a basic string function and
inheritance.  Having a str_cpy() macro wouldn't make sense for instance.
Although the ones that do do a lot are generally error checking wrappers
(create), generic (remove_from_list), or just forced inline (can_see).

I think some MUD bases just do that code in every function instead of a
separate function.

George Greer  -   | Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity | is not thus handicapped. -- Elbert Hubbard

     | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ:  |
     | |

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST