| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Magnus Hagander" <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Questions about warnings |
| Date: | 2007-01-25 13:11:15 |
| Message-ID: | 873b5zckuk.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> The code in question is:
>
> const char **headers;
>
> [...]
>
> free(headers);
Perhaps it ought not be declared "const char **headers" if you're planning on
freeing it? I mean, it's not like you can pass an actual pointer to constant
memory to this function and expect it to work, and who says free doesn't
modify the data the pointer points to anyways, plenty do.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-01-25 13:18:57 | Re: Questions about warnings |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-01-25 12:38:14 | Re: Questions about warnings |