Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 07:35:53 -0700 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposed chage to sbuf semantics. Message-ID: <200101111435.f0BEZrs28389@aslan.scsiguy.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "11 Jan 2001 10:23:01 %2B0100." <xzpg0iq30ju.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> writes: >> If the user really wants to finalize an overflowed sbuf, they can >> explicitly un-overflow it using setpos() (this is documented in the >> NOTES section of the man page). Please to not change the behavior of >> sbuf_finish(). > >Actually, there's one alternative: provide a flag (settable at >sbuf_new() time) that tells sbuf_finish() to ignore overflows. Why should the constuctor of the sbuf have to know this. Perhaps the sbuf is filled by helper functions, etc. This just ties the hand of the user. -- Justin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200101111435.f0BEZrs28389>