RFR-8008118

[John Zavgren]

All:

How does this look?
1.) I reverted the for statement formatting change.
2.) I removed the goto statement and "inlined" some code instead.
3.) I checked to make sure that we're not freeing memory that we didn't actually allocate. (Path vector elements that are empty.)



http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jzavgren/8008118/webrev.04/

John
----- Original Message -----
From: christos at zoulas.com
To: martinrb at google.com, john.zavgren at oracle.com
Cc: core-libs-dev at openjdk.java.net
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:00:10 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: RFR-8008118

On Mar 21, 10:10am, martinrb at google.com (Martin Buchholz) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: RFR-8008118

| Please revert this formatting change:
| 
| -        for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++)
| -            ;
| +        for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++);
| +
| 

Stylistically I prefer:

	    for (q = p; (*q != ':') && (*q != '\0'); q++)
		    continue;

so that re-formatting accidents don't happen, and the intent is clearly
communicated.

christos