On Wed, 25 May 2016, Tim Keitt wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Michael Lawrence <lawrence.mich...@gene.com
wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 4:23 AM, Jeroen Ooms <jeroen.o...@stat.ucla.edu>
wrote:
I'm not disagreeing with what's been said in this thread, but I can't help
but recall that I brought up this exact issue probably 15 years ago and was
told (by Brian, I believe) "don't do that" (pass a null pointer), which was
perfectly fine. The real issue was not the behavior but that it was not
documented or consistent. I've lived by the mantra since that you can never
trust a pointer in R code. User must always check for NULL.
In _C_ code. This is true whether you are calling into the R C API or
any other C library: you as the C programmer need to make sure either
that passing NULL is OK or make sure you don't do that.
I wouldn't object to mkXXX checking for NULL and signaling an error
instead of segfaulting, but good C code calling mkXXX should still
typically do its own check and handle the situation in an appropriate
way.
Best,
luke
I just wrote my own functions mkXXX_safe that wrap the internals and check
the pointer.
THK
http://www.keittlab.org/
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
--
Luke Tierney
Ralph E. Wareham Professor of Mathematical Sciences
University of Iowa Phone: 319-335-3386
Department of Statistics and Fax: 319-335-3017
Actuarial Science
241 Schaeffer Hall email: luke-tier...@uiowa.edu
Iowa City, IA 52242 WWW: http://www.stat.uiowa.edu
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
