httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: Solaris bus error?
Date Fri, 26 Jun 1998 19:47:18 GMT
If you handle "impossible" cases without complaint you are losing a very
valuable debugging tool.  That is my argument.  I'm not saying we
shouldn't handle impossible cases.  I'm saying that this impossible case,
if it occurs, is SYMPTOMATIC OF SOMETHING FAR WORSE.

And I'm not going to put a band-aid on it and pretend it'll go away. 

Dean

On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> All I'm saying is that it's common, recommended, taught and safe
> practise to handle such "impossible" cases, esp when it's so simple.
> That's not ignoring your point of, if it does fix something, then
> we have a more serious problem. 
> 
> Of course, I tend to think of such people as K&R as experts, so maybe
> I'm showing my prejudice and age here :) :)
> 
> Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > 
> > The == is an assumption built into the code.  If anything we could make an
> > assert <=, but I'm not going to allow a patch that hides a case that I
> > can't see as ever happening. 
> > 
> > I know I made a == -> >= change in ap_vformatter.  That was because I
> > could prove that >= was indeed a possibility (based on input from the
> > caller).  Whereas in this case it just shouldn't happen.  Changing it
> > hides a potentially nasty bug that can have far more consequences...
> > 
> > Dean
> > 
> > On Fri, 26 Jun 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > 
> > > Agreed that the need for the patch implies further damage. However,
> > > IMO, it's also standard defensive programming to try to catch
> > > "impossible" cases (like putting 'default's on case's not needing
> > > them, etc...).
> > > 
> > > Dean Gaudet wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > No, we need to know if it fixes anything... because if it does we have
a
> > > > far more insidious bugs to find... if that small patch fixes anything
then
> > > > ap_bputc is also broken. 
> > > > 
> > > > Dean
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I have applied your little patch, Dean and so far the problem
hasn't
> > > > > > surfaced, but that doesn't mean all that much.  It didn't happen
very
> > > > > > often before, and now that my DirectoryIndex setting is correct,
it
> > > > > > probably wouldn't happen again on the production server regardless
of your
> > > > > > patch.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Should we commit it anyway, to be safe?
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > ===========================================================================
> > > > >    Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
> > > > >             "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
> > > > >             cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > ===========================================================================
> > >    Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
> > >             "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
> > >             cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ===========================================================================
>    Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
>             "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
>             cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"
> 


Mime
View raw message