On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:03:08 +0300 Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> wrote:

> On 05/05/12 06:18, David Seikel wrote:
> > Just ignoring the failed allocation and trying to use a NULL pointer
> > will likely crash you anyway, but that's just being lazy.  Failing
> > gracefully is generally better than failing disgracefully.
> 
> Yes, but the amount of work just doesn't worth it.

It would be a lot of work now to retrofit it to EFL, but I usually at
least stick in a NULL check at the time I add any allocs.  Usually,
sometimes I'm too lazy to, but often add it later.

-- 
A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants
coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to