[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: oops? read/write vs type of length parameter

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: oops? read/write vs type of length parameter
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 05:41:25 -0400

> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 01:19:10 -0700
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, Jim Meyering <address@hidden>
> I added a runtime check for this, which I don't think
> will ever fail, but I've been surprised in the past.

If it ever fails, aborting is too harsh, I think.  The original code
was well defended against that possibility, see write-region.  It
would signal an IO error.

> With that check in place we might as well use size_t for the size,

Which will cause annoying compiler warnings, at least with some
optional switches.

> with the goal of removing the runtime checks once we have
> carefully checked that they aren't needed.

Which will never happen, so these aborts will stay in the code

> Here's the patch I installed for that.

I don't understand why you went ahead and installed such a change,
although it was clear that your opinion on this is being disputed, and
at least I explicitly expressed my disagreement with changing that
argument to an unsigned type.  As long as you are not the head
maintainer, I think such unilateral actions are inappropriate.

But if I'm the only one who objects to that (both the change and
disregarding the disagreement), then so be it.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]