nmav at gnutls.org
Mon Mar 13 13:54:48 CET 2006
On 3/11/06, Werner Koch <wk at gnupg.org> wrote:
> > Maybe but this doesn't change my argument. It is less portable than
> > the ISO/ANSI C behavior. Given that libgcrypt is already ported to
> > non-UNIX systems as well, I would consider this a bug.
> To protect against ill behaving implementaions we even use some
> failsafe code in the internal malloc code:
Ok, thanks, then my concern of this behaviour not working is addressed. A
small bug in the code is that errno is not set to zero before
thus if a system does not set errno, and errno (most likely)
contains some previous value that value will be detected.
In any case I don't find any benefit into checking errno for memory
allocation. The value is not interesting at all, and it adds
complexity to the code.
More information about the Gcrypt-devel