On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 11:38:53AM -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote: >> Previously the goal of veryfy_env() is just deactivate, the goal of >> build_env() is just build. It was build_env() who insetrts new environ >> variables into envVars array in old variant, isn't? > > Yes, it was. Now, it is to merge in a new environ array. I renamed it > __merge_environ() to better reflect its new role. Well, I see. You try to keep envVars[] between environ switch by that way. But it still look complicated and probably gains nothing. I.e. will be much _faster_ just free envVars[] (but not variables themselfs) and allow build_env() to calloc() new array for envVars and fills it from new environ. It is surely faster than calling setenv() for each variable just for sake of keepeng once allocated envVars[]. Moreover, environ switch commonly used to switch from large environ to smaller one (or to empty one), so the rest of old envVars[] array would keep unneccessary allocation. > The alternative, which I had actually considered, is to split setenv() > into __setenv() which is almost the entire current setenv() and a new > setenv() that is just a wrapper around __setenv() with the beginning > checks. This seems a bit of a waste, but I may be mistaken. Well, no recurse level increase problems but just slowdown. -- http://ache.pp.ru/Received on Sat Jul 07 2007 - 11:09:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:13 UTC