On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> wrote: > On 9 Jul 2014, at 11:56, Yann Ylavic <ylavic....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Marion & Christophe JAILLET >> <christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >>> Just a few details : >>> >>> 1) Shouldn't we use 100-continue (lowercase c) instead, to more closely >>> match http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec8.html, ยง 8.2.3 ? >>> This would also be consistent with the use of this string in >>> protocol.c >>> >>> > >>> 2) if of any use, in the fast path, strcmp could be used instead of >>> strcasecmp >> >> It seems that HTTP (unquoted-)tokens are case insensitive: >> http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec14.html#sec14.20 : >> "Comparison of expectation values is case-insensitive for unquoted >> tokens (including the 100-continue token), and is case-sensitive for >> quoted-string expectation-extensions." >> >> So we can probably use lowercase 100-continue to conform the rfc >> "wording", but the case sentive comparison looks invalid. > > strcmp would only be used on the fast path - the slow path could cover the > case insensitive case.
That would be a (little) faster path, but probably hit less often... Regards, Yann.
