[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Query on kdelibs/kdecore/io/kgrantpty.c
From:       "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03 () volumehost ! net>
Date:       2007-07-29 7:38:26
Message-ID: 200707290238.31737.bss03 () volumehost ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Sunday 29 July 2007 02:15:54 am Brad Hards wrote:
> I'm doing some experiments with a static checker, and my initial rule
> checks threw up a lot of errors, possibly many false alarms [dear lazyweb,
> is it an error to  do FooClass *p = new FooClass; p->member = bar; without
> checking if p is null?]

Depends.  Standard C++ says new doesn't return NULL, 0, or any other null 
pointer; it throws an instance of std::bad_alloc instead.  I forget how to 
make new return a null pointer (which may or may not *be* NULL, but will 
compare equal to NULL).

> One that does look like an error is in kgrantpty.c
> Around line 149 is this line:
>     tty = malloc(strlen(pty) + 1);
>
> That never gets free()'d that I can see.
>
> Does that count as a bug, or is it OK because this is a standalone
> application and it gets cleaned up on exit?

It's a bug, in that application.  A non-buggy OS will clean up where the 
application doesn't though, so if the application isn't meant to be 
long-running it shouldn't cause many problems.  (It's still a bug though.)

I'd imagine that code could be fairly easily replaced with some QString or 
QByteArray code.

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                               ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net                                 ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy                `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                                 \_/       

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]