From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org  Mon Oct 19 21:50:21 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27515A19122
 for <freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:21 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2488A53;
 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:20 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.55.3])
 by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id A88E54F860;
 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by critter.freebsd.dk (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id t9JLoCl9094057;
 Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:12 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org>
cc: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>, NGie Cooper <yaneurabeya@gmail.com>,
 freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] importing e* (embolic, estrdup,
 etc) functions from NetBSD (libc/libutil or libnetbsd)?
In-reply-to: <20151019212750.GB64504@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
References: <74F6DD3C-42F6-490B-A08E-245A1338A3E7@gmail.com>
 <CAPyFy2AuDPL4qgawfaRhyWA1dp=29VfFBAdi06ygZ2UABB=D3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151019212750.GB64504@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <94055.1445291412.1@critter.freebsd.dk>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:12 +0000
Message-ID: <94056.1445291412@critter.freebsd.dk>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:50:21 -0000

--------
In message <20151019212750.GB64504@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>, Brooks Dav=
is writes:

>This feels like the right approach to me as well.

I looked at it at one point and I found it seriously lacking.

The philosophy seems to be "just stick 'e' in front and you're done"
but in practice that is not even close.

The *real* problem they're trying to solve is safe string handling,
and the e* functions only cover a small corner area of that space.

Their implemenation also seems half-hearted in many ways.  For
instance they have not specified what happens if the error handler
returns to the e* function.

And finally, C-with-exceptions ?  Really ?

I far prefer sbuf(3) to e*(3)

-- =

Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    =

Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence=
.