On Friday 10 August 2001 11:56, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On 10 Aug 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * Remove all zero length buckets from the brigade.
> > + * @param b The bucket brigade
> > + */
> > +#define APR_BRIGADE_NORMALIZE(b) \
> > + do { \
> > + apr_bucket *e; \
> > + e = APR_BRIGADE_FIRST(b); \
> > + if (e->length == 0) { \
> > + apr_bucket *d; \
> > + d = APR_BUCKET_NEXT(e); \
> > + apr_bucket_delete(e); \
> > + e = d; \
> > + } \
> > + e = APR_BUCKET_NEXT(e); \
> > + } while (e != APR_BRIGADE_SENTINEL(b))
> > +
> > /*
> > * General-purpose reference counting for the various bucket types.
> > *
>
> What if you call this on a brigade that's already empty? You'll probably
> segfault. You should move the while test up to the top of the loop, I
> think.
It shouldn't seg-fault. Looking at the logic, the BRIGADE_FIRST will always
work,
regardless of how many buckets are in the brigade. The length of the sentinel
should
never be 0, and if it is, there is a bigger bug. And, APR_BUCKET_NEXT should
always
provide something, even if we are operating on the sentinel.
So, I don't think this is a problem. Of course, feel free to make the change,
the logic
is identitical. It makes even less of a difference now that Doug added the
exterior do {}
while loop.
Ryan
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
