examples: Implement the negotiated group output for wolfSSL#2066
examples: Implement the negotiated group output for wolfSSL#2066tatsuhiro-t merged 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
|
/gemini review |
Summary of ChangesHello, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request enhances the Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
| using namespace std::literals; | ||
|
|
||
| auto name = wolfSSL_get_curve_name(ssl_); | ||
| if (!name) { | ||
| return ""sv; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return name; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request implements the get_negotiated_group function for the wolfSSL backend. The implementation is functionally correct. I have provided one suggestion to make the code more concise and idiomatic by using modern C++ features.
| std::string_view TLSSessionBase::get_negotiated_group() const { | ||
| using namespace std::literals; | ||
|
|
||
| auto name = wolfSSL_get_curve_name(ssl_); | ||
| if (!name) { | ||
| return ""sv; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return name; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This function can be made more concise and idiomatic. Using an if statement with an initializer allows you to check the pointer and declare the variable in one step, limiting its scope. This change also removes the need for using namespace std::literals; and uses return {}; to create an empty std::string_view, which is a clean approach.
std::string_view TLSSessionBase::get_negotiated_group() const {
if (const auto *name = wolfSSL_get_curve_name(ssl_)) {
return name;
}
return {};
}
No description provided.