--On Sunday, August 11, 2002 6:38 PM +0200 Stipe Tolj
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> While some Octstr functions handle NULLs gracefully, others (especially
>> the formating ones) do not behave so gentlemen-like. this patch will
>> cause NULLs received instead of Octstr* in some cases not to panic the
>> box but instead be handled in a predictable manner.
>
> again -1 for this, sorry Oded.
>
> The <NULL> returns are very dangerious for functions that deal with
> XML output and hence you dump a null'ed Octstr as "<NULL>" cstr which
> oviously will break XML structures and semantics.
I see here the association with XML and I missed that.
--On Sunday, August 11, 2002 8:04 PM +0300 Oded Arbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stipe Tolj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>> > Ok - you are correct here too :-). how about using (NULL)
>> or [NULL] instead ?
>>
>> Hmm, what is exactly the problem with it now (or revision backed) is?
>> I don't got the point I guess.
>
> this part :
> seems_valid_read(ostr,file,line,func);
>
> where if the parameter is NULL for some reason, bearerbox panics.
>
I am with Oded here. If a panic can be overcome by the functionality
it should be possible. Oded patch did this. Stipe, if you don't want
this solution another is to handle an error all the way up to where
you can recover, but panicing is to much.
And for (NULL) or [NULL] I don't care. Indeed the <NULL> is to close
to XML.
Harrie
Internet Management Consulting
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http ://www.mod-snmp.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Author of MOD-SNMP, enabling SNMP management to the Apache server.
