Hi Mindaugas,
> if hLib <= 32 && <<<-- Here error
>>
>> Probably 'IF Empty( hLib )' should be used here, and LoadLibrary()
>> modified to return NULL when pointer is <= 32.
>>
>> But now I know why we had this code full of numeric pointers.
>>
>> We can also leave LoadLibrary() as compa
On Thu, 14 May 2009, Mindaugas Kavaliauskas wrote:
Hi,
> We can not return empty collectible pointer! So, simple NULL pointer
> instead of collectible is also a kind of different type. Well, both has
> VALTYPE() == "P", but in C code it looks like different type:
Exactly and personally I prefe
Hi Vailton,
Not exactly "from now on" :) rather, it's better practice, since a normal
pointer may be NULL. Even if you don't return NULL, user may pass
one to your function.
BTW, it can be even simpler by using this code:
---
HB_FUNC (TEST)
(
some *pPtr = (add *) hb_parptr(1);
if (! pPtr)
I have much code writing using something like this:
HB_FUNC (TEST)
(
some *pPtr;
if (! ISPOINTER (1))
return;
pPtr = (add *) hb_parptr (1);
... more code here
)
As I understand it then from now on the right would add a further validation as:
HB_FUNC (TEST)
(
some *pPtr;
I have much code writing using something like this:
HB_FUNC (TEST)
(
some *pPtr;
if (! ISPOINTER (1))
return;
pPtr = (add *) hb_parptr (1);
... more code here
)
As I understand it then from now on the right would add a further validation as:
HB_FUNC (TEST)
(
some *pPtr;
In my code in cases like this I return NIL instead of NULL
pointer. This
is better for future compatibility, if we are going to change to
collectible pointers in the future. Since the value of the
collectible
pointer will not be NULL.
My vote goes to returning same type for both e
Viktor Szakáts wrote:
Hi Mindaugas,
if hLib <= 32 && <<<-- Here error
Probably 'IF Empty( hLib )' should be used here, and
LoadLibrary() modified to return NULL when pointer is <= 32.
But now I know why we had this code full of numeric pointers.
