Re: gcc and mint-libs PL46

[mk@anuurn.do.open.de (Martin Koehling)]

In <9506062232.AA23109@math.uni-muenster.de>,
Bjarne Pohlers (bjarne@GOEDEL.UNI-MUENSTER.DE) wrote:

>|>Chris Herborth wrote:
>|>>I'm really amazed (and a little frightened) by the amount of flack we're
>|>>getting for suggesting that the libraries be made a little (a very
>|>>little!) more robust...  Do all of you always check your paramters
>|>>before every system call?  Do all of you always check your return
>|>>values?
>|>
>|>Amen. How much larger would a program be if the libs did the check for
>|>NULL (once) instead of the program (many times, potentially)?
>|>
>*Please* can we stop that discussion.

No. :-)

>The fact is, there are libraries
>(not only the MiNT library) which do not check parameters to fopen &
>co. So the program has to check it itself to be portable.

OTOH, there *are* libraries out there that *do* check for NULL filename
pointers - for maximum portability, the MiNTlib should do so, too!
And after all, we're talking about only *two* lines of code to be added
to a single function...

-- 
 Martin Koehling | mk@anuurn.do.open.de | Martin_Koehling@un.maus.ruhr.de