On Sat, 5 May 2012 16:15:39 +0200 Cedric BAIL <cedric.b...@free.fr> wrote:
> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 1:18 PM, David Seikel <onef...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 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. > > We are speacking about E, EFL are almost always checking for memory > allocation and try to return to a safe state in case of an issue. But > things will turn badly if you are running out of memory anyway ! Replace "EFL" with "e17" in what I said then. But my main concern still stands. SOMETIMES things will turn badly if you are running out of memory anyway. Sometimes not. See the part of my email that is not quoted in the very top of this one for my examples. -- A big old stinking pile of genius that no one wants coz there are too many silver coated monkeys in the world.
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
