Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote Monday, April 04, 2011 6:13 AM
I think it is good that these are fixed, but not important enough
to
spend serious time on finding and plugging all of them. The
question
is how much of the code we should consider user-serviceable. If
one
C++ part of Lily passes data using Scheme types to another C++
part,
should that other part be resistent users inserting bogus values
into
that internal channel ?
Can we distinguish code that is publicly accessible in Scheme? Or
maybe those routines that are advertised in the docs. If so, it is
these
that need to be robust. I would not be worried by segfaults in
anything
that is accessible only via a local build. Anyone building LP can
surely
handle segfaults themselves. But users struggling with Scheme need
all the help we can provide.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
