Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-12 Thread Josuah Demangeon
Sorry, I was trying s-nail, and answered by mistake. Have a nice day!

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-11 Thread jd
Connor Lane Smith wrote: > On 11 June 2016 at 07:34, wrote: > > Strings are not idenpotent. In C strings, any pointer inside > > of the string is a new string. Splitting strings is only > > writing a 0. Splitting strings in Pascal strings require to > >

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-11 Thread Connor Lane Smith
On 11 June 2016 at 07:34, wrote: > Strings are not idenpotent. In C strings, any pointer inside > of the string is a new string. Splitting strings is only > writing a 0. Splitting strings in Pascal strings require to > allocate a new chunk of memory and copy all the characters.

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-11 Thread k0ga
> I you pointed to a perfect example. While extremely it is extremely > convenient for some architectures to represent strings as a pointer to > char/bytes + an implicit terminator, Pascal strings (really, a > struct/object containing pointer + length) are imminently safer. As This is not true.

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread Louis Santillan
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:20 AM, FRIGN wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 03:02:44 -0700 > Louis Santillan wrote: > > Hey Louis, > >> As to justification, I'd say, that depends. Libc (and C in general) >> has some well known, well documented bugs that exists simply

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread Louis Santillan
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:19 AM, Kamil Cholewiński wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jun 2016, Louis Santillan wrote: >> As to justification, I'd say, that depends. Libc (and C in general) >> has some well known, well documented bugs that exists simply to keep >> old

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread FRIGN
On Fri, 10 Jun 2016 03:02:44 -0700 Louis Santillan wrote: Hey Louis, > As to justification, I'd say, that depends. Libc (and C in general) > has some well known, well documented bugs that exists simply to keep > old code compiling (many methods that start with str*,

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread Kamil Cholewiński
On Fri, 10 Jun 2016, Louis Santillan wrote: > As to justification, I'd say, that depends. Libc (and C in general) > has some well known, well documented bugs that exists simply to keep > old code compiling (many methods that start with str*, malloc/free > corner but frequent

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread Louis Santillan
On Friday, June 10, 2016, FRIGN wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:06:54 -0700 > Louis Santillan wrote: > > Hey Louis, > > > Good job for getting this working. I'm a believer that suckless > > indirectly speaks to API design in addition to software design.

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread FRIGN
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:06:54 -0700 Louis Santillan wrote: Hey Louis, > Good job for getting this working. I'm a believer that suckless > indirectly speaks to API design in addition to software design. There > are many parts of libc that suck, IMO. Years ago, when I found

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread hiro
[i have too much time][i have too much time][i have too much time][i have too much time][i have too much time][i have too much time][i have too much time] On 6/10/16, Louis Santillan wrote: > Sylvain, > > Good job for getting this working. I'm a believer that suckless >

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-10 Thread Louis Santillan
Sylvain, Good job for getting this working. I'm a believer that suckless indirectly speaks to API design in addition to software design. There are many parts of libc that suck, IMO. Years ago, when I found Felix von Leitner's talk about software design [0], and dietlibc [1], and libdjb [2],

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Sylvain BERTRAND
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 07:18:21PM +0200, Markus Wichmann wrote: > 3. smtp_line_send() can't handle short writes, because the pointer that > is handed in as second argument to write() is never advanced... Fixed. Thx! -- Sylvain

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Greg Reagle
On 06/09/2016 01:35 PM, FRIGN wrote: On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:18:21 +0200 Markus Wichmann wrote: Hey Markus, Dear Lord, it's been a while since I've seen such nice code make so bafflingly bad design choices. Where to start? the suckless mailing list is not a place for

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread FRIGN
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:18:21 +0200 Markus Wichmann wrote: Hey Markus, > Dear Lord, it's been a while since I've seen such nice code make so > bafflingly bad design choices. Where to start? the suckless mailing list is not a place for religious cults. > 1. The whole ulinux

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Markus Wichmann
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10:50:56PM +1100, Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: > Hi, > > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la suckless: lnanosmtp > > https://github.com/sylware/lnanosmtp > https://repo.or.cz/lnanosmtp.git > > cheers, > > -- > Sylvain > Dear Lord, it's been a while since

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Dimitris Papastamos
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 03:41:22PM +0200, FRIGN wrote: > This is so full of bullshit. There's no reason e.g. not to make it > compilable on the BSD's. The Linux syscall-interface is also prone > to changes. If the Linux syscall interface changes in a non backwards-compat manner then it is

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread FRIGN
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 15:02:29 +0200 Kamil Cholewiński wrote: Hey Kamil, > So libc is overkill, but instead you ship an entire tangled hierarchy of > nonportable and arch-specific headers to talk directly to the kernel, > which will all probably break in a random point

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Kamil Cholewiński
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016, Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 02:03:33PM +0200, Kamil Cholewiński wrote: >> On Thu, 09 Jun 2016, Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Sylvain BERTRAND
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 02:04:07PM +0200, FRIGN wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:50:56 +1100 > Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: > > Hey Sylvain, > > > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la suckless: lnanosmtp > > > > https://github.com/sylware/lnanosmtp > >

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Sylvain BERTRAND
On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 02:03:33PM +0200, Kamil Cholewiński wrote: > On Thu, 09 Jun 2016, Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la suckless: lnanosmtp > > > > https://github.com/sylware/lnanosmtp > >

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread FRIGN
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 22:50:56 +1100 Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: Hey Sylvain, > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la suckless: lnanosmtp > > https://github.com/sylware/lnanosmtp > https://repo.or.cz/lnanosmtp.git I looked at the code and wondered: what the

Re: [dev] [lnanosmtp]

2016-06-09 Thread Kamil Cholewiński
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016, Sylvain BERTRAND wrote: > Hi, > > Introducing a new minimal and naive smtp server à la suckless: lnanosmtp > > https://github.com/sylware/lnanosmtp > https://repo.or.cz/lnanosmtp.git > > cheers, > > -- > Sylvain Ages old, stupid question. What's