Hi Przemek and all, We have hb_parc()/hb_parcx()/hb_itemGetCPtr() to return direct pointers to Harbour strings (maybe more).
I've stumbled into some C code (rddads, hbhpdf) directly passing these buffers to C level functions _returning_ values in this buffer. This may corrupt HVM. Such code is currently difficult to find. Question: should we make the return value of these functions 'const' ? (and maybe do some tricks to stay compatible when user code is using _parc()). Or in general: Shouldn't we make better use of 'const' flag? Does these make any sense? [ Few examples for possible HVM corruption, after recompiling hbwhat32 with const flag: GETCOMPUTERNAMEEX(), GETUSERNAME(), ACCEPT() ] Brgds, Viktor PS: I know this would cause an avalanche in 'const'-ing various other function parameters and add casting, and I also know of hb_itemUnShareString(), and I'm not suggesting to solve it before 1.0. _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
