Jonathan Tan <jonathanta...@google.com> writes: > If we do that, there is also the necessity of creating a string that > combines the separators and '=' (I guess '\n' is not necessary now, > since all the lines are null terminated). I'm OK either way. > > (We could cache that string, although I would think that if we did > that, we might as well write the loop manually, like in this patch.)
I wonder if there is a legit reason to look for '=' in the first place. "Signed-off-by= Jonathan Tan <j...@my.home>" does not look like a valid trailer line to me. Isn't that a remnant of lazy coding in the original that tried to share a single parser for contents and command line options or something?
