On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 1999 at 09:58:51AM +0200, John Hay wrote:
> > Well the original line is plain wrong if Brian's patch is being used,
> > because there message is a pointer and the size of a pointer is 4.
>
> Yes, yes, yes. Warner and I are *not* that stupid WRT C. We were both
> commenting on the *original* proposed patch. Geez.
>
> Now rather than try to call us stupid, Kris (and only Kris) could say,
> "well, I've decided to go with a dynamically allocated buffer, so of
> course I can't use sizeof() any more".
Hey, hey, I'm also not stupid, but thanks for implying that :P If I
had intended to commit what I whipped up quickly, I would be checking
it pretty carefully. It seems I'm catching a lot of flak on not
having "audited" what was basically a "proof of concept", showing the
kind of thing I'd rather have. I like the precomputed one (add all
argv[] strlen's and malloc that) better, anyway.
>
> --
> -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
>
--
Brian Fundakowski Feldman \ FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! /
[EMAIL PROTECTED] `------------------------------'
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
