--WChQLJJJfbwij+9x
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 12:52:32PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>=20
> On Jun 21, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Bill Studenmund wrote:
>=20
> >If the program is trying to printf() something, it's trying to say
> >something. Whether or not it's in unrecoverable error land or not, my
> >experience is it's easier to figure out what's wrong if you see
> >"client=3D(null)" or some such in an output file rather than getting =20
> >a core
> >dump. Yes, you can figure it out from the core dump, but the printf =20
> >says
> >it quicker.
>=20
> In the case of "client=3D(null)", maybe.  But consider cases where you =
=20
> would not be able to distinguish the magic from user-provided input.

I've tried to consider them, and I do not see what you're aluding to.

Yes, it is impossible to differentiate between code printf()ing a NULL=20
pointer and printf()ing "(null)". I however fail to see what that=20
contributes to the discussion. Please explain.

Take care,

Bill

--WChQLJJJfbwij+9x
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFCuHN/Wz+3JHUci9cRAvWRAJ9a8VdjhMrmrIhUJxCjMJQXXokw0gCeN6IT
LbxMFbNGB1gih1zxNPOBLx4=
=VsjT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--WChQLJJJfbwij+9x--