apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sander Striker" <stri...@samba-tng.org>
Subject RE: cvs commit: apr-util/include apr_md4.h
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2001 18:55:37 GMT
Oops, sorry. I was thinking from the library point of view
where all errors should be handled. If the policy is segfaulting
when NULL pointers are passed that makes sense to me.

However, I would suggest putting in something like:

#ifdef APR_MD4_DEBUG
    assert(context);
#endif

This way if you don't know why your app is segfaulting the
code asserts and you can find your way back to it.

Sander

PS. Are there any documents describing the policy? Would be
    helpfull for new apr coders and patch writers.


> On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 02:25:18PM -0400, Jeff Trawick wrote:
> > jerenkrantz@apache.org writes:
> > 
> > Justin, I'm sorry I didn't see this before.
> > 
> > yuck!
> 
> Okay, I'll back out the EINVAL stuff.  Yeah, I thought it was hokey.
> Sorry.  I was more interested in the apr_md4/apr_md5 call and didn't
> pay attention to the other stuff.  I'll do better next time.  =)
> 
> IIRC, the standing APR policy is to segfault in this case.  Actually,
> I'll back out in a few hours (when I get back from class) to give 
> others a chance to comment on this.  If we were consistent, APR_EINVAL
> makes some sort of sense, but I don't think that we do this anywhere
> else.  So, yeah, we should back this out.  -- justin
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message