From: Christian Kellermann <ck...@pestilenz.org> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] proposed bugfix for #706 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:25:21 +0200
> * felix winkelmann <fe...@call-with-current-continuation.org> [110929 03:18]: >> I would suggest simply to detect the error in C_file_info_2, and act >> accordingly (by calling whatever stupid POSIX API that has to be used >> for this, probably incompatible with the way stupid Windows does it, >> and all the stupid crap programmers have to put up with nowadays) and >> using a flonum for the size-slot in the file info vector. > > I am not quite sure I understand this correctly. Catch the error > and if it is an overflow, redo it with a flonum? I am not sure if > this is even possible since the internal check is against whether > you are a 32-bit application and your off_t datatype is large enough > to hold the size. I meant: catch the error and do whatever necessary to obtain the file size using some other means (if that is possible - the manpage seems not to suggest what to do in case of EOVERFLOW) and store a flonum in the vector return by C_file_info_2. I'm probably missing something again. I just read up on this and it's just all a terrible mess. > > My manpage here suggests compiling with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 in > this case to make this error go away. (Silly I know). Probably the only thing that helps, but needs to be tested for all platforms. > For all the other errors we still need to add checks IMHO. This > should also include a sane way to report them (have you seen the > bug #707?). What other errors do you mean specifically? cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
