string-match and string-looking-at

[Matthew Love <matth love gmail com>]

Hi all,

I've noticed that 'string-match and 'string-looking-at both 
return an error when one of the input strings is '(). 'string= 
will return '() in such cases.  

It seems it would be better for 'string-match and 'string-looking-at to
also return '() if one of the input "strings" is not actually a string,
as in such cases the strings do not technically match.

What do you think?

I have attached a patch that will have 'string-match and
'string-looking-at return '() if one of the input strings is not a
string. Im fairly new to c so im not sure if there is a better way 
to do it.

Cheers.

diff --git a/src/find.c b/src/find.c
index 6f9ec6f..7d27183 100644
--- a/src/find.c
+++ b/src/find.c
@@ -280,8 +280,15 @@ still case-significant.
 {
     rep_regexp *prog;
     long xstart;
-    rep_DECLARE1(re, rep_STRINGP);
-    rep_DECLARE2(str, rep_STRINGP);
+    if(rep_STRINGP(re) && rep_STRINGP(str))
+      {
+	rep_DECLARE1(re, rep_STRINGP);
+	rep_DECLARE2(str, rep_STRINGP);
+      }
+    else
+      {
+	return Qnil;
+      }
     rep_DECLARE3_OPT(start, rep_INTP);
     xstart = rep_INTP(start) ? rep_INT(start) : 0;
     prog = rep_compile_regexp(re);
@@ -312,8 +319,15 @@ Updates the match data.
 {
     rep_regexp *prog;
     long xstart;
-    rep_DECLARE1(re, rep_STRINGP);
-    rep_DECLARE2(string, rep_STRINGP);
+    if(rep_STRINGP(re) && rep_STRINGP(string))
+      {
+	rep_DECLARE1(re, rep_STRINGP);
+	rep_DECLARE2(string, rep_STRINGP);
+      }
+    else
+      {
+	return Qnil;
+      }
     rep_DECLARE3_OPT(start, rep_INTP);
     xstart = rep_INTP(start) ? rep_INT(start) : 0;
     prog = rep_compile_regexp(re);

-- 
mrl