Re: [PATCH] Re: sscanf("-1", "%d", &i) fails, returns 0

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
?
> Sure, it looks cleaner that way, although gcc has already put <*dig>
> in a local register; i.e., it's not pulled from memory for each test.
> Here's a (tested) version that does that.

Why do you have that "dig" pointer at all? It's not really used.

Why not just do

	+	char digit;
	...

	+	digit = str;
	+	if (digit == '-')
	+		digit = str[1];

(and maybe it should also test for whether signed stuff is even alloed or 
not, ie maybe the test should be "if (is_sign && digit == '-')" instead)

		Linus