Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2003
Re: your malloc patches
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Jarkko Hietaniemi
Date:
June 15, 2003 11:14
Subject:
Re: your malloc patches
Message ID:
20030615181416.GE469614@kosh.hut.fi
> > This just isn't cricket for non-GCC compilers (Solaris, AIX, and Tru64
> > claim a syntax error, IRIX seems to tolerate it). That a function
> > call (Perl_doing_taint in this case) gets expanded to func(a,b,) just
> > isn't going to work. (What does leaving out an argument like that
> > _mean_, anyway? An implicit 0?)
>
> It is a *macro*, not a function call! Macros operate on strings. An
> empty string is a perfectly valid string (though I do not know what
When the macro gets expanded at the very beginning of main() we get this:
if (Perl_doing_taint(*&argc, *&argv, ))
which makes many C compilers to choke, but apparently not gcc.
> the C standard says on this).
>
> Anyway, this slot is not used, so put there NOTUSED.
I have no idea what you mean by NOTUSED. If you mean the trick you said:
#define NOTUSED
#define MALLOC_CHECK_TAINT2(argc,argv) MALLOC_CHECK_TAINT(argc,argv,NOTUSED)
That doesn't work since that gets expanded to exactly the same as above.
--
Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhi@iki.fi> http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ "There is this special
biologist word we use for 'stable'. It is 'dead'." -- Jack Cohen
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next