On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 11:01:21AM +0200, René Scharfe wrote:

> This section is about "The FLEXPTR_* variants", so use FLEXPTR_ALLOC_STR
> in the example.

Oops, yeah. Your patch is clearly an improvement.

Since this is obviously an easy mistake to make (using one form rather
than the other), I wondered if the compiler would catch it.

I think it would catch an accidental use of FLEXPTR instead of FLEX,
because it involves an attempted assignment of an array. But I don't
think we would catch the reverse; we'd just write the data directly on
top of the pointer. That would probably crash immediately at runtime, so
if you exercise the code at all in tests, it is OK. But something to be
aware of.

I suppose it could assert(sizeof((x)->flexname) == FLEX_ALLOC) or
something, but I'm not sure if it is worth worrying about.

-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to