Re: ep_alloc overused?

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Oct 24, 2009, at 3:03 PM, Jakub Zawadzki wrote:

> Code is ok, and works fine... But I've got 3 questions:
>  1/ There's ep_strdup_printf() function - shouldn't it be used in  
> cases like it?
>     (IMHO best way)

That would be the right choice...

...if info_str were used for something other than col_add_str().

However, in that *particular* case, it's not used for anything else,  
so it should just use col_add_fstr() in each of the case statements.   
(Oh, and not use check_col() any more; that's deprecated.)

>  2/ Why ep memory is used in first place, shouldn't be
>       gchar info_str[200];
>     used instead of
>       gchar *info_str = ep_alloc(200); ?

Maybe the theory was that overflowing an ep_allocated buffer is better  
than overflowing a stack buffer, but

        1) it's g_snprintf, so you shouldn't *have* a buffer overflow

and

        2) as long as you're ep_allocating it, you might as well use  
ep_strdup_printf().

>  3/ 200 bytes buffer is overkill - shouldn't g_sprintf() be used?
>     (if programmer make mistake in buffer size canary check will  
> abort program)

I wouldn't vote for g_sprintf() - or any other flavor of sprintf(); I  
don't want to rely on anything else to abort the program if you  
overflow the buffer.

> or both 4 ways are ok, and there's no best one? :)

I think the base way to handle this *particular* case is to use  
col_add_fstr().
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe