On 10 October 2014 15:20, Tomas Guisasola Gorham <to...@tecgraf.puc-rio.br> wrote: > Hi Hisham and Philipp > > I am not sure the pull request is a safe implementation since > an error (not enough memory?) could occur after the malloc and before > the free... There is no way to let the compiler accept the problematic > construction? It would be not only safe but also a simpler code to read > and maintain :-)
The current construct is not safer: if it runs out of stack space then it will crash just like not checking the return of malloc would (and running out of stack is more common than running out of heap space). The proposed patch with a one-line addition to check the malloc would make the code safer[*] and not that uglier: if (!to) return 0; -- Hisham [*] in principle, because making an entire library resilient to out-of-memory failures is usually a lot of work... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://p.sf.net/sfu/Zoho _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list Luarocks-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
