On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 11:22:01AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Steve Friedl wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 10:57:59AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> 3. The agent/mibgroup/mibII/ip.c, function int ip_handler, line 892
> >>    return NULL is bad, as you've noticed.
> >>    the value (int) NULL is assumed to be 0, [not universally true!]
> >
> >
> >When one wants a portable value for NULL, one should just use the
> >integral constant 0; this is correct in every case;
> >
> >     return 0;       /* NULL */
> >
> >Guaranteed to generate the proper bits on any platform.
> >
> 
> Let's investigate further.
> 
> There are two returns in this ip_handler function.
> Why are other SNMP_NOSUCHOBJECT cases using "continue" ?
> Was this return 0 necessary and sufficient ?
> 

I'm sorry that I wasn't clear: I was only commenting on a narrow issue
of the C language, and have no opinion on the merits of the patch itself.
I suspect your "why not make it consistent?" comment will prove dispositive.

Steve

-- 
Stephen J Friedl | Security Consultant |  UNIX Wizard  |   +1 714 544-6561
www.unixwiz.net  | Tustin, Calif. USA  | Microsoft MVP | [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - 
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, 
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Net-snmp-coders mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders

Reply via email to