Thomas Martitz wrote:
> Bryan VanDyke wrote:
>> Thomas Martitz wrote:
>>
>>> Linus Nielsen Feltzing wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike Holden wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Maybe leading zeros should only be stripped if another digit follows
>>>>> them?
>>>>>
>>>>> I use names like 00RockFaves.m3u, 00ClassicRock.m3u for playlists
>>>>> that I
>>>>> have created (as opposed to original artist albums), and the leading
>>>>> zerozero is deliberately there to sort them at the top.
>>>>>
>>>> That's an interesting observation. I believe leading zeroes are
>>>> treated like whitespace in the current code, but in this case I think
>>>> that the final zero should be kept.
>>>>
>>>> Linus
>>>>
>>> That's not trivial, and adds complexity. You basically need to look at
>>> the current, the next, and one more for this, instead of just the
>>> current char.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Actually it not that bad.
>>
>> Pseudo code:
>>
>> get current
>> get next
>> while (current != null && next != null && current == '0' && next is a
>> number)
>> {
>> current = next
>> next = get next
>> }
>>
>>
>>
> Now imagine this for every char in a string, and for every string in a
> file list (with some 100 files). It's three-times (or even more) more
> complexity than just.
> while (is_zero(a))
> a = next;
>
> We're on embedded, and thus slow systems. Your would surely work well on
> a desktop app, but for mp3-players we need fast and small code. The gain
> has to justify the code, and I don't think it does it in this example.
>
What about something like this. Taking in consideration the isspace
function/comparison was removed? And isdigit is supposed to give nonzero
on nodigit values.
/* skip over leading zeros */
while ('0' == ca && nat_isdigit(ca_next) )
{
ca = to_int(a[++ai]);
ca_next = to_int(a[ai+1]);
}
