Re: [PATCH] wip: change ISSPACE to use ascii whitespace check.

"Kevin J. McCarthy" <[email protected]> Thu, 19 Feb 2026 20:30:56 +0800

Newsgroups	gmane.mail.mutt.devel
Message-ID	<aZcCgJSA4j-JSXEe@qinghai>

On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 03:20:25PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>I've been looking at these functions and macros recently in neomutt(1),
>and I was thinking that maybe we should have macros that define the
>specific different kinds of white space.  Something like this:
>
>	#define MUTT_CTYPE_SPACE_C      " \t\n\v\f\r"  // [:space:]
>	#define MUTT_CTYPE_RFC5322_FWS  " \t\r\n"   // 'FWS' (3.2.2.)
>
>then, we could use it for example here to replace the SKIPWS() call as
>
>	s += strspn(s, MUTT_CTYPE_SPACE_C);
>
>The name of the white-space macro would make it more readable to
>understand exactly which kind of white space is used in each call.
>
>Also, strspn() is C89 standard, and quite simple to understand, compared
>to groking all the different macros --with inconsistent names-- we have.
>
>What do you think?

I'm not dead set against it, but I've never thought the macros or naming 
were confusing.

Making the implementation of each the same seems like a good idea, but I 
think it would be a shame to get ride of the skip_xxx() and is_xxx() 
macros.  To me they make the code more readable, not less.

However, I've been looking at the code for a long time, so I'm sure I'm 
biased by familiarity.

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)