On 03/03/2010 09:53 PM, Benjamin Scott wrote: > Neat. Whoever wrote that code split the error message across > multiple adjacent C literal strings. Sometimes I wonder if > programmers are deliberately making our lives harder. > You should have seen how we did it in lint on Tru64. Part of it used a message catalog, part used its own internal message array.
Basically, when I write code I try to keep my lines under 80 columns for readability, but I also don't like to break up my messages that way either. That is why I shortened the search. > Is the incredibly-large-number different for different runs of the > program? (If so, it's prolly an uninitialized variable; if not, it's > prolly broken program logic doing something consistently non-sensible. > Not that that helps us much.) > > I note that you're running x86-64. I wonder if it's programmer > brain damage, assuming that all integers are 32 bits wide. > > I think it it more of an uninitialized variable issue, but I did not trace the code back that far. My time is a bit crunched this week. BTW: I appreciate the insight on this. IMHO, this is a bug in the LVM2 library, and I may file a bugzilla on it when I can grab more info. I'm brain damaged by the Digital compiler guys who used to beat the Hell out of me in the ZKO caf when I would file a bug report, especially Ed Vogel :-) -- Jerry Feldman <g...@blu.org> Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id: 537C5846 PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
