Re: getline & getline_safe
Derek Robert Price <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs,gmane.comp.version-control.cvs.bugs |
|---|---|
| Organization | Ximbiot <http://ximbiot.com> |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Paul Eggert wrote: >Derek Robert Price <[email protected]> writes: > > > >>Don't most modern operating systems allow ulimit to limit process size? >> >> > >Yes, but that's a crude weapon, whereas getline_safe() is aimed just >at this particular problem. > >Personally, I don't like functions whose name ends in "_safe". >Nothing is 100% safe. It's better to end their name in "_safer". >Or better yet, why not call it "getnline" as per the original bug report: ><http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00326.html> > getnline() is fine with me. >>If getline_safe() _is_ necessary, is there interest in importing it >>into GNULIB (it really just wraps a call to getdelim2())? >> >> > >I'd have interest, though I don't see how you can just wrap a call to >getdelim2. Don't you also need to modify getdelim2's signature? > > Oops. Yes. I read too quickly and assumed that getdelim2() was just the old getstr() in ccvs/lib/getline.c with a new name. So a new getndelim() function would be needed for wrapping or just the getnline() function. Derek -- *8^) Email: [email protected] Get CVS support at <http://ximbiot.com>! -- [Let us] go on in doing with [the] pen what in other times was done with the sword, [and] show that reformation is more practicable by operating on the mind than on the body of man. - Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1792