[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF4BF-Sa6vfGGTmw1-8zFoAVZpi92o8wfQsSMpV=Y0+KhkyO6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 18:19:30 -0400
From: Christopher Friedt <chrisfriedt@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Possible oversight in setvbuf()
On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 6:06 PM Rich Felker, <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 05:46:54PM -0400, Christopher Friedt wrote:
> > A good process for adding new features is to add tests with them. Even if
> > there is only a test for expected behaviour, at least it will catch one
> > possible regression.
>
> Yes, I should really do that more. Sometimes it's not obvious what
> should be tested though. In the case of setvbuf, the intended behavior
> is in some sense untestable (the previous implementation not using the
> caller-provided buffer was valid); in hindsight the obvious important
> thing to test is that it doesn't result in writes outside the buffer.
>
If you need more than that basic test.c program that I provided before for
addrconfig, i'd be happy to add some more test cases.
>
Content of type "text/html" skipped
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.
