Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ben Bacarisse" data-source="post: 5161223">Yes.  You could writebool table[256];bool *tab = table - CHAR_MIN;(I used bool because that's logically the right type and you are a fanof C99, but there might be a reason you chose char.)You should certainly swap which pointer you do *(unsigned char *) on.If you make a local unsigned char *pset, change p to be char * and usethe cast on tab[*p] instead, you get far fewer type mismatches withpretty much the same code complexity.  (And you can remove c, it's notused.)But, since you return a pointer to the null byte when none of thenon-null characters is found, logically the null is in the set ofsearched-for characters.  The code gets a lot simpler if you treat thenull just like the others:bool table[256] = {0};bool *tab = table - CHAR_MIN;do tab[*set] = true; while (*set++);while (!tab[*str]) ++str;return str;gcc compiles this to 20/21 instructions (depending on optimising forspeed or size).  That's fewer than your hand-coded assembler version,though it may, of course, be either more bytes, or slower, or both.</blockquote>