On 2016-03-15 22:13:28, Seth Arnold wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:38:25PM -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote: > > > Do you prefer this instead? > > > > > > if (set_variable(&foo)) > > > /* branch A */ > > > > > > if (foo) > > > /* branch B */ > > I do; it's not identical in the general case but it is in this case and > it's a lot easier for me to read. Thanks.
No problem.
>
> > -void parse_label(bool *_stack, char **_ns, char **_name, const char *label)
> > +bool parse_label(bool *_stack, char **_ns, char **_name,
> > + const char *label, bool yyerr)
> > {
>
> > + if (err) {
> > + if (yyerr)
> > + yyerror(err, label);
> > + else
> > + fprintf(stderr, err, label);
> > +
> > + return false;
> > }
>
> Just a passing fancy that if instead of "bool yyerr" the parameter were
> "(void)(yyerr(char*, char*))" (or something along those lines) then we could
> supply function pointers to describe how to handle the error, and remove
> half the code in this block, which we'll probably wind up duplicating into
> more and more functions.
>
> Then callers would call e.g.:
>
> parse_label(&stack, &ns, &name, label, &yyerror);
>
> or
>
> void errors_to_stderr(const char *err, const char *label)
> {
> fprintf(stderr, err, label);
> }
> parse_label(&stack, &ns, &name, label, &errors_to_stderr);
>
> Maybe tonight's not the night to sort out our error handling but including
> blocks like this everywhere would probably get tiring.
I thought about something like that but since some messages don't
include the label string and some do, it makes it a little messy.
>
> > @@ -585,7 +587,27 @@ static int process_dfa_entry(aare_rules *dfarules,
> > struct cod_entry *entry)
> > /* allow change_profile for all execs */
> > vec[0] = "/[^/\\x00][^\\x00]*";
> >
> > - vec[index++] = tbuf.c_str();
> > + if (!kernel_supports_stacking) {
> > + bool stack;
> > +
> > + if (!parse_label(&stack, &ns, &name,
> > + tbuf.c_str(), false)) {
> > + return FALSE;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (stack) {
> > + fprintf(stderr,
> > + _("The current kernel does not support
> > stacking of named transitions: %s\n"),
> > + tbuf.c_str());
> > + return FALSE;
> > + }
>
> Thanks, this is easier for me to follow.
>
> Another aside, there's a similar error message for audit messages in this
> function that's not labeled for translation. We may want to set aside some
> time to make a pass through the parser and add or remove messages from
> translations.
I have noticed those while going through various parts of the code. I'll
start trying to do a better job of fixing those issues as I see them.
>
> Acked-by: Seth Arnold <[email protected]>
>
> Thanks
Thank you!
Tyler
> --
> AppArmor mailing list
> [email protected]
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- AppArmor mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/apparmor
