I am not sure if va_start can be called twice in a row (rekursive).
Manual does not say anything about that.
How about:
cvs -z3 -q diff zend_hash.c (in directory S:\php4-HEAD\Zend)
Index: zend_hash.c
===
RCS file:
See http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/stdarg.h.html
This appears to imply that va_start() can be used more than twice.
And I don't think va_start() always has to be invoked.
Moriyoshi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Börger) wrote:
I am not sure if va_start can be called twice in a
Some comments on ISO9899 standard
7.15.1.3-2 Read between the lines: without va_end the behaviour is undefined.
What ever that means i guess you have to call va_end and that requires
va_start.
7.15.1.4-3 Says do not call va_start twice without va_end.
marcus
ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (E) ©ISO/IEC
Yep, the spec goes right. a corresponding va_end() dtor should be applied
to ap once ap has been initialized by a va_start().
IMO no va_end() is needed without a preceding va_start(), and it doesn't
matter if ap is used between va_start() and va_end().
BTW, could anyone commit this patch if
Moriyoshi could you make a *.phpt file from the bug?
Attached is a new diff tested already. It also fixes a compiler warning.
Since i do not have Zend karma someone with karma should commit it
or give me karma.
marcus
cvs -z3 -q diff zend_hash.c (in directory S:\php4-HEAD\Zend\)
Index:
done.
Moriyoshi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marcus Börger) wrote:
Moriyoshi could you make a *.phpt file from the bug?
Attached is a new diff tested already. It also fixes a compiler warning.
Since i do not have Zend karma someone with karma should commit it
or give me karma.
marcus
cvs -z3
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Marcus Börger wrote:
Moriyoshi could you make a *.phpt file from the bug?
Attached is a new diff tested already. It also fixes a compiler warning.
Since i do not have Zend karma someone with karma should commit it
or give me karma.
I can commit this, after you fix the
I haven't followed the thread. What is the problem with the var_args()?
Also, please don't commit the second part of the patch. The warning is due
to the compiler not understanding the code well enough. Functionality wise
there's no reason to NULL that variable. Live with the warning or upgrade
var_args issue doesn't have much to do with the purpose of the patch. We
were perhaps just curious about the usage of va_start() and va_end().
And that warning reducer was later added by Marcus, so the first version
should look nice. What about it?
Moriyoshi
Andi Gutmans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
