I turned on tight-scope by pointing it at a directory with a library in.
To start with, it (somewhat confusingly) tells me that all my API functions
should be static. It doesn't seem to have the option to say they should be
extern. This is not so bad, of course: I can work out that I should have
m
On 11/06/2013 04:27 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> Is nmalloc a standard (or proposed standard)?
No, but it should be, because of the integer overflow problem.
Is that something you can get the ball rolling on?
Standardization committees are not my strong suit.
On 6 November 2013 14:51, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 11/06/2013 07:48 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> > Nothing so exciting I'm afraid, it's there to give 'git describe' a fair
> shot at working even in a shallow cloned gnulib subproject - otherwise
> certain invocations of bootstrap can break the relea
On 11/06/2013 07:48 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Nothing so exciting I'm afraid, it's there to give 'git describe' a fair shot
> at working even in a shallow cloned gnulib subproject - otherwise certain
> invocations of bootstrap can break the release rules in maint.mk.
>
> Jim plans to push a v
On 6 November 2013 14:48, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Hi Reuben,
>
> > On Nov 7, 2013, at 3:28 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> >
> > I'm intrigued by the version number tag 0.1 I get from a recent gnulib
> update, but poking around a) the repo, b) the mailing list archive, c) the
> sources and d) the we
Hi Reuben,
> On Nov 7, 2013, at 3:28 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
> I'm intrigued by the version number tag 0.1 I get from a recent gnulib
> update, but poking around a) the repo, b) the mailing list archive, c) the
> sources and d) the web gives no clue as to its meaning or intended use.
> Apo
I'm intrigued by the version number tag 0.1 I get from a recent gnulib
update, but poking around a) the repo, b) the mailing list archive, c) the
sources and d) the web gives no clue as to its meaning or intended use.
Apologies if I've overlooked something, but I'd love to be enlightened.
I suspec
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:27:57PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 01:13:35PM +0100, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > For syncing with libc refactoring of malloc following patch adds for
> > consistency nmalloc variants.
> >
> > These will make overflow checking o
On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 01:13:35PM +0100, Ondřej Bílka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For syncing with libc refactoring of malloc following patch adds for
> consistency nmalloc variants.
>
> These will make overflow checking of common allocations automatic as in
> next patch.
>
> * lib/xalloc.h (NMALLO
