Re: [Q] Segmentation Fault error of AddressManager.app

[NeXT]

For your interests, I'm using transmeta crusoe machine(Sony VAIO, C1-MTL) Is 
this related to this situation?

On 2003-10-13 16:52:04 +0900 Richard Frith-Macdonald <richard@brainstorm.co.uk> 
wrote:

> 
> On Monday, October 13, 2003, at 08:04 AM, Björn Giesler wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On 2003-10-13 08:00:57 +0200 NeXT <chunsj@embian.com> wrote:
>>> it died with segmentation fault error. What I've found is wakeFromNib of
>>> Controller.m has a problem. -setFillsSuperview:
>>> needs a super view but current code does not set superview before above
>> 
>> Yes. Thanks for pointing that out; I fixed it. Strange that it segfaults on 
>> your machine, though -- [self superview] should return nil, and sending 
>> messages to nil is OK, so [[self superview] frame] should return a bogus 
>> rect, but shouldn't segfault, and on my box it doesn't. Strange.
> 
> FYI sending a -frame message to nil will return nil ... a pointer rather than 
> a structure (the expected NSRect).
> 
> On Intel hardware this tends to just mean that a garbage rect is returned, 
> but on other hardware it's common
> that this results in a segfault instead.  Basically, the convention that it's 
> ok to send a message to nil is strictly
> only true if the expected return type is an object, though as far as I know 
> it's ok on all real machines for
> void, scalar, and pointer return types as well.
> 
> Certainly, if the return type is a structure or a float/double you should be 
> careful that you are not sending
> the message to nil.
> 
>