On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 02:53:36PM +0200, Gabriel Ivăncescu wrote:
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Ivăncescu <gabrielopcode(a)gmail.com> ---
no-op patch.
This has been cleaned up so now all the comparison code (for each of the 3 variants) is only written once because the outer loop will wrap around, which also avoids the ugly macro. Of course it also uses the helpers and avoids having a pointless item variable (especially since we already tracked the index to begin with).
dlls/comctl32/listbox.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c b/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c index 954866a..dd29dc6 100644 --- a/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c +++ b/dlls/comctl32/listbox.c @@ -965,46 +965,48 @@ static INT LISTBOX_FindFileStrPos( LB_DESCR *descr, LPCWSTR str ) */ static INT LISTBOX_FindString( LB_DESCR *descr, INT start, LPCWSTR str, BOOL exact ) { - INT i; - LB_ITEMDATA *item; + INT i, end = descr->nb_items;
if (descr->style & LBS_NODATA) return LB_ERR;
- if (start >= descr->nb_items) start = -1; - item = descr->items + start + 1; + start++; + if (start >= descr->nb_items) start = 0; if (HAS_STRINGS(descr)) { if (!str || ! str[0] ) return LB_ERR; if (exact) { - for (i = start + 1; i < descr->nb_items; i++, item++) - if (!LISTBOX_lstrcmpiW( descr->locale, str, item->str )) return i; - for (i = 0, item = descr->items; i <= start; i++, item++) - if (!LISTBOX_lstrcmpiW( descr->locale, str, item->str )) return i; + for (;;) + { + for (i = start; i < end; i++) + if (!LISTBOX_lstrcmpiW(descr->locale, str, get_item_string(descr, i))) + return i; + if (!start) break; + end = start; + start = 0; + } }
These nested for loops are ugly. What about something like this (having set up start as you've already done): for (i = 0, item = start; i < descr->nb_items; i++, item++) { if (item == descr->nb_items) item = 0; if (!LISTBOX_lstrcmpiW(descr->locale, str, get_item_string(descr, item))) return item; } Huw.