Re: Ticket #105 (NULL checks)

On Dec 31, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Andy Dougherty wrote: We can solve it by getting rid of the attribute_nonnull decorations and replacing them with assert()s. An even better solution is to keep the attribute_nonnull and also add asserts. The ARGIN()/ARGOUT() decorators are useful both to GCC

Re: Ticket #105 (NULL checks)

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008, chromatic wrote: > On Wednesday 31 December 2008 12:26:07 Andy Dougherty wrote: > > > This is not a hypothetical what-if situation.  I have lost many hours to > > just this situation.  See my long example in ticket RT #50684.  To save > > everyone from looking it up, I will e

Re: Ticket #105 (NULL checks)

On Wednesday 31 December 2008 12:26:07 Andy Dougherty wrote: > This is not a hypothetical what-if situation.  I have lost many hours to > just this situation.  See my long example in ticket RT #50684.  To save > everyone from looking it up, I will extract the relevant example here: Your copy and

Re: Ticket #105 (NULL checks)

On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 09:22:01AM -0800, Mark Glines wrote: > kjstol wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:03 PM, Mark Glines > > wrote: > > > > Andy Dougherty wrote: > > > One trap: If the gcc attribute_nonnull is still used for these same > > > f