Hi,
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 06:27:00PM +0200, zhengda wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> But isn't it always right to initialize a local variable to reduce
>>> the possibility of getting bugs?
>>
>> It won't avoid bugs; only either cover them up, or (less likely)
>> expose them more clearly -- depending on context...
>>
> Right, it cannot avoid bugs, but I believe it is more likely expose
> the bugs in the program.
It really depends on the context. In some cases -- if the pointer is
dereferenced -- NULL will create an obvious failure, while some random
uninitialized pointer might be harder to track down.
In other cases -- if it's used as argument to realloc(), free() etc.; or
if it's tested as a result from some other operation (getenv() in this
case) -- NULL will be treated as perfectly valid, and not give any
indication of failure at all!
Thus I don't think it's good practice in general to initialize all
pointers to NULL...
> 2008-06-30 Zheng Da <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * hurd/hurdsocks.c (_hurd_socket_server): Searches environment variables
> for the socket server insteading of using the default one.
> (SOCK_SERV_%d, SOCK_SERV): The environment variables that contains
> the path of the socket server.
As was pointed out by someone in the earlier discussion, we don't use
the term "path" in this context. SOCK_SERV_%d contains a file name,
SOCK_SERV a directory name.
Perhaps you could just say "location" instead of "path"...
(BTW, I still think that SOCK_SERV_DIR for the latter would be
clearer... But I don't insist on this if you prefer it as is :-) )
> - socket_t server;
> + socket_t server = MACH_PORT_NULL;
This is not necessary anymore, as "server" will be always assigned,
unless we error out earlier...
> + char *np = NULL;
Err... I thought it was obvious that what I said about initializing
variables would also apply here...
> + char *sock_servs = NULL;
...and here as well.
> + if (__asprintf (&name, "SOCK_SERV_%d", domain) < 0)
> + __libc_fatal ("hurd: Can't get the socket server path\n");
What happened to indentation here?!
-antrik-
