I'd say the fact that it has to do checking within the routine anyway is no reason not to add checks to catch errors earlier. Making the signature programmer-friendlier is like adding javascript validation to a web form - sure, the target of the submission still has to do its own validation, but it's still helpful for the user to do it up front.
On 10/5/08, NotFound <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> (I'm making as many parameters and struct members unsigned as possible so >> that >> the compiler can warn us if we ever use signed values with them. This is >> one >> nice way to check some of our assumptions.) > > But sting_substr is called directly from opcodes, then the simpler way > is that his arguments reflects directly those of the registers > implied, and make all checks and conversions desired inside the > function. > > -- > Salu2 > -- Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
