Restore the x509_hash_name_alpgorithm_change patch.

Restore the x509_hash_name_alpgorithm_change patch.

This is needed to ensure that the linux_redux build runs its unit
tests properly on Lucid build bots.

+ Remove obsolete patches/ directory that wasn't removed in previous
  CL (everything is under openssl/patches/ now).
Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=190582

[Ryan Sleevi, 2013-03-21 19:56:01]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c
File openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c#...
openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c:328: hash_array[0]=h;
Why structured like this?

Why not
hash_array[0]=X509_NAME_hash(name);

since you assign h on line 332

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c#...
openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c:330: for (hash_index=0; hash_index < 2;
hash_index++)
++hash_index

[digit1, 2013-03-21 21:23:31]

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c
File openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c#...
openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c:328: hash_array[0]=h;
That's not my code :-) I'll try to fix it nonetheless.

[wtc, 2013-03-21 22:41:48]

Patch set 1 LGTM.

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c
File openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c#...
openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c:330: for (hash_index=0; hash_index < 2;
hash_index++)

On 2013/03/21 19:56:01, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> ++hash_index

Our C++ Style Guide only recommends using the
pre-increment operator on iterators.

In C code it is common to post-increment for loop index
variables, which seems to be the local preference in this
file (see line 333).

http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml#Preincrement_a...

[agl, 2013-03-22 13:52:36]

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c
File openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/12459028/diff/1/openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c#...
openssl/crypto/x509/by_dir.c:330: for (hash_index=0; hash_index < 2;
hash_index++)
On 2013/03/21 22:41:49, wtc wrote:
> Our C++ Style Guide only recommends using the
> pre-increment operator on iterators.

Long ago, post incrementing STL iterators was less efficient and so a style
guide clause was born:

"Use prefix form (++i) of the increment and decrement operators with iterators
and other template objects."

It only ever applied to iterators and the like, and it's long been the case that
C++ compilers will generate exactly the same code for both i++ and ++i, even
then.

This aspect of the style guide is now an anachronism.

[digit1, 2013-03-26 07:58:14]

Committed patchset #2 manually as r190582 (presubmit successful).