[Oorexx-devel] Opinions on how to handle SysFileTree() errors?

2012-07-25 Thread Mark Miesfeld
After going through the code for SysFileTree() on Unix, it was apparent it would be easy for it to seq fault. I've reimplemented SysFileTree on both Windows and Unix using the new APIs and cleaned up the areas where it was possible to crash. Here is output on a Fedora Linux. First run the test

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Opinions on how to handle SysFileTree() errors?

2012-07-25 Thread Rick McGuire
I'm definitely in favor of enlarging the buffers. My personal preference would be no error or truncation, but rather detect if truncation is going to occur (or has occurred) and allocate a temporary buffer of sufficient size. Rick On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Mark Miesfeld

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Opinions on how to handle SysFileTree() errors?

2012-07-25 Thread Mike Cowlishaw
is passed a longer buffer from the caller's stack together with all the other arguments. Mike -Original Message- From: Rick McGuire [mailto:object.r...@gmail.com] Sent: 25 July 2012 19:09 To: Open Object Rexx Developer Mailing List Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] Opinions on how to handle

Re: [Oorexx-devel] Opinions on how to handle SysFileTree() errors?

2012-07-25 Thread Mark Miesfeld
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Mike Cowlishaw m...@speleotrove.com wrote: Another approach is for the function to handle the problem: Okay, well both Rick and Mike's answer is pretty much the same, allocate a bigger buffer when needed. Good thing I asked, I didn't really consider that.