Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 20:07:46 +0200 From: Thomas Quinot <thomas@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Thomas Quinot <thomas@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: freeaddrinfo(NULL) Message-ID: <20040921180746.GB49259@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <ygefz5bh6lt.wl%ume@FreeBSD.org> References: <20040921123016.GA41677@melusine.cuivre.fr.eu.org> <ygefz5bh6lt.wl%ume@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Hajimu UMEMOTO, 2004-09-21 :
> Because, the behavior of freeaddrinfo (NULL) is undefined in RFC 2553
> nor RFC 3493. Having such an assumption is a potentially bug and
> lose portability.
That a construct has no defined meaning does not imply that we must make
every effort to break applications that (erroneously) make use of it.
Would there be any significant drawback for conforming applications
if we made our best to deploy a safety net againt buggy user programs
by not segfaulting in this case?
There are many situations where the system already detects an invalid
pointer and reports it gracefully as an error rather than triggering a
fatal signal.
Thomas.
--
Thomas.Quinot@Cuivre.FR.EU.ORG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040921180746.GB49259>