COM_Parse and multiline comments/DP save compatibility

[mh]

[taniwha]

Hmm, I find it hard to imagine that this would cause any compatibility issues, so it's probably a good thing to spread through the various engines.

However, I see a minor bug: "/*/" is treated as a complete comment because you skip over only the opening "/" but not the opening "*".

The double increment after the check for "*/" seemed suspicious, but then I realized it's skipping the closing "*/". I'm not 100% certain (~98%), but I think you can get away with "if (data[0]) data += 2;" because the only way to get there is for data[0] to be 0, or for data[0..1] to be "*/".

[mh]

I was a bit suspicious of the double data++ myself (it's been a coupla years after all) but I've double-checked against the way DarkPlaces handles this and can see that my code was almost a direct copy & paste from it (which I obviously did and then completely forgot about) so I'll leave everything stand.

[taniwha]

Oh, it's correct, but the second "if (data[0])" is redundant (the double increment should be merged).

However, the first single data++ is not correct (doesn't matter what darkplaces does). I've tested

[mh]

I don't disagree. I'm just being wary of the fact that LordHavoc never added a comment explaining his reasons for doing it this way, and am wondering if there was some obscure bug it was intended to fix, or was he just having a brainfart that day? Since the double "if (data[0])" does no harm I'm more inclined to leave it be on account of that.

[taniwha]

I'd say the biggest problem with the double "if (data[0])" is it is confusing.

Any comments on that single "data++" before the while loop?

[mh]

[taniwha]

[szo]

[taniwha]

Yeah, I got the email, too. I'm considering how to write a test case for "make check".