-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 10/26/2009 05:13 PM, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> Personally I tend to prefer a "strict usage" where the arguments are not
> optional (ie they must not be NULL) and the function implementations can
> assume that they are set correctly as per the documentation. assert()s
> etc could be used to verify for debug-builds.
>
> But I'm open for what others think. If we have documented these
> functions to allow NULL for not storing any info, then we should of
> course check them. We should be consistent among all the functions that
> are so similar methinks.
My $0.02:
+1 to strict API + modifying all the other functions AND documenting it
in the manpages that the API is strict.
Jakub
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkrnMsgACgkQHsardTLnvCUgrwCgjprudje0YAf12P1utQGblmM7
yI0An00EmDGDtQ5LB/r1fDpRRU1n3TRe
=7t7D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
