Alejandro Colomar wrote: > This finds the first non-'/'. Since the first character is a '/' (we > have set that a few lines above in `*slash = '/';`), we were manually > skipping it.
That's the perfect way to write such a thing. > However, that's unnecessary, since the function will > similarly skip it. > > It seems a benign off-by-one mental bug, which didn't result in any > actual bug, but still worth "fixing", or rather, simplifying. No, that's not a simplification, but adding a computation that we already know is unnecessary (and that the compiler typically will not optimize away). De-optimization is OK when it improves maintainability. But here, it doesn't do so. As a programmer, one only needs to look 3 lines above to see why the code is correct. Bruno
