On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Michael Jennings <e-de...@kainx.org> wrote: > On Tuesday, 14 April 2009, at 18:19:57 (-0300), > Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > >> yes, it is better, because you can know when you're not using them >> and if you are using them without proper initialization, so you would >> not hide a bug, possibly a segfault. See: >> >> char *a; >> ... >> if (strcmp(a, "x") == 0) ... // compile warning >> >> now compare: >> >> char *a = NULL; >> ... >> if (strcmp(a, "x") == 0) ... // silent segv > > The real problem here is that you're blindly dereferencing a pointer > without checking its validity first. And the proper way to do that is > to initialize it to NULL first and then check for NULL before > dereferencing. Dereferencing a potentially invalid pointer is the > error and will SEGV whether that pointer is NULL or not.
I can't believe you really work with software development. Do you overcheck EVERY TIME? char *a = NULL; if (a && strcmp(a, "x") == 0) ...; if (a) memcpy(b, a...) I usually know the code that I do, or others do. I always read what's there before changing. If others don't do it, then it's not MY fault. I'll simply not develop C code thinking that someone might be stupid enough... oh wait,... -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: barbi...@gmail.com Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
