On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:02:01PM -0600, William A Rowe Jr wrote:
> Doesn't this simply gloss over an underlying defect?
> 
> [...]
>     if (apr_dbm_fetch(f, key, &val) == APR_SUCCESS && val.dptr) {
>         *value = apr_pstrmemdup(pool, val.dptr, val.dsize);
>     }
> 
>     apr_dbm_close(f);
> 
>     return rv;
> }
> 
> Shouldn't we capture and return the failure code from apr_dbm_fetch here?

The error code from the failed lookup is not an interesting result, I 
assume because it can only fail one way.  That the lookup failed is 
reflected by returning with success *value set to NULL.

I had this change in my wc from looking at clang/coverity static 
analysis results so I assume it was flagged up somewhere but can't 
remember exactly.  It seems like a harmless change.

Reply via email to