---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:01:54 -0700 >From: "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: SSL_connect and SSL_accept >To: <openssl-users@openssl.org> > > >> So what you are saying is the scenario we have been discussing so far is >> possible ONLY in case of memory allocation issues NOT OTHERWISE. >> I guess I will have a look at the SSL_connect code before I just >> trust this >> :-) > >I would still recommend coding to handle this case. Perhaps the next version >of OpenSSL will include a check in SSL_connect that this version does not >have. It's not a good idea to build undocumented insider information about a >library into code that calls into that library. You should do that only when >there is a very good reason. > >DS
Thank you David, I guess I understand what you are suggesting. "Better not rely on the current implementation of any function provided by the library, as it may change any time. It is better to write a code that relys only on the documented facts and does not assuming anything not mentioed there." ~ Urjit DISCLAIMER ========== This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Persistent Systems Pvt. Ltd. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Persistent Systems Pvt. Ltd. does not accept any liability for virus infected mails. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
