Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:46:22 -0400 From: David Schultz <das@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG, src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: svn commit: r191330 - head/usr.bin/ncal Message-ID: <20090421194622.GA19215@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20090421190651.GA2505@freebsd.org> References: <200904201819.n3KIJcZo054306@svn.freebsd.org> <20090421185436.GA18628@zim.MIT.EDU> <20090421190651.GA2505@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009, Roman Divacky wrote: > > Also, before this change, ncal was already full of convoluted > > buffer handling, arbitrary buffer sizes, and little to no bounds > > checking. This commit adds more magic numbers and fragile buffer > > handling code, and generally makes an already hairy program even > > less scrutable. This isn't your fault, but it would be nice if we > > could make ncal better before it gets much worse. For instance, > > you might use snprintf() or asprintf() instead of an extra half > > dozen calls to memcpy() with various offsets. > > yes, thats true. do you want me to revert this? I am perfectly fine > with having locally modified cal that supports this highlighting > and not share this with world at all. I don't care (although some other people on this thread seem to); I'm just encouraging you to clean things up a little before making the code even less maintainable.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090421194622.GA19215>