Willy,
Am 19.03.20 um 15:55 schrieb Willy Tarreau:
> Actually I'm pretty sure that I did it this way precisely for performance
> reasons: avoid repeatedly checking a pointer for half of the headers which
> are pseudo headers (method, scheme, authority, path just for the request).
>
> It's
Hi Tim,
On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 03:15:24PM +0100, Tim Duesterhus wrote:
> Willy,
>
> I know you dislike adjusting code to please static analyzers, but I'd argue
> that using the new IST_NULL + isttest() combination is easier to understand
> for humans as well. A simple .ptr == NULL check might
Willy,
I know you dislike adjusting code to please static analyzers, but I'd argue
that using the new IST_NULL + isttest() combination is easier to understand
for humans as well. A simple .ptr == NULL check might also be slightly faster
compared to isteq() with an empty string?
I have verified
3 matches
Mail list logo