Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 01:01:07 -0700
On Aug 14, 2012, at 5:32 PM, Evan Huus wrote:
The case in the filed bug is fairly trivial to fix, but I'm wondering if this is something that should be added to the Code Style / Portability section of README.developer?
No - it should be added to the "Robustness" section; I'd say "Portability" is for telling people to avoid GCCisms and other features that are, in some compilers or development environments, valid, while "Robustness" is for telling people to avoid things that, while they might happen to work with some compilers or on some instruction set architectures, aren't officially guaranteed to work on any platform. ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
Current thread:
- Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Evan Huus (Aug 14)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Guy Harris (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Jeff Morriss (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers mmann78 (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Jeff Morriss (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Evan Huus (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Jakub Zawadzki (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Guy Harris (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Jakub Zawadzki (Aug 16)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Guy Harris (Aug 16)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers mmann78 (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Jeff Morriss (Aug 15)
- Re: Passing NULL to %s format specifiers Guy Harris (Aug 15)