Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- From: "Claudio Natoli" <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>
- To: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 19:07:04 +1000
- Message-id: <C9A33A2803C7F3479A02A333328A174756CAC0@ewell.memetrics.local> <text/plain>
Magnus Hagander writes: > Now, I still twist my head around the lines: > if ((fd = _open_osfhandle((long) h, fileFlags & O_APPEND)) < 0 > || > (fileFlags & (O_TEXT | O_BINARY) && (_setmode(fd, > fileFlags & (O_TEXT | O_BINARY)) < 0))) > > > With the _setmode() call deep in the if statement... I would suggest we > split that up into a couple of lines to make it more readable - I'm sure > all compilers will easily optimise it into the same code anyway. > Reasonable? I agree it would be clearer if split up. Without having studied it closely, it might also highlight a bug on failure of the second clause -- if the _setmode fails, shouldn't _close be called instead of CloseHandle, and -1 returned? (CloseHandle would still be called on failure of the _open_osfhandle, obviously) Cheers, Claudio
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- Prev by Date: Re: Developer's Wiki
- Next by Date: Ignore that mail (was: jar in repository)
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCHES] Bad bug in fopen() wrapper code
- Indexes: