Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150817134556.GA31031@openwall.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:45:56 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: auditing our use of FMT_* flags

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 08:45:44PM +0800, Kai Zhao wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> > static char *fmt_self_test_body(struct fmt_main *format,
> >     void *binary_copy, void *salt_copy)
> > {
> >         static char s_size[32];
> > [...]
> >                 for (size = 0; size < PASSWORD_HASH_SIZES; size++)
> >                 if (format->methods.binary_hash[size] &&
> >                     format->methods.get_hash[size](index) !=
> >                     format->methods.binary_hash[size](binary)) {
> >                         sprintf(s_size, "get_hash[%d](%d)", size, index);
> >                         return s_size;
> >                 }
> >
> > and that's the only use of it.  In your code, this choice of variable
> > name makes no sense to me.
> 
> Could I change the "s_size" to "err_buf" ?

Sounds fine.

Alexander

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.