lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:52:51 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	anders.blomdell@...trol.lth.se, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Stray nulls when reading from AF_UNIX sockets


On Sep 6 2007 12:23, David Miller wrote:
>>     return copied ? : err;
>>   }
>> 
>> Shouldn't this read:
>> 
>>     return copied ? copied : err;
>> 
>> Or am I missing something?
>
>These two statements are equivalent, the first version is
>a shorthand allowed by gcc.

Not only that. With x?x:z, x is evaluated twice,
while with x?:z, x is only evaluated once. That's for stuff when you 
want to, say [dumb example follows],

size_t my_read(..) {
    return read(..) ? : -1
}

and the only other way would be to use a temporary,

size_t my_read(..) {
	size_t x = read(..);
	return x ? x : -1;
}

gcc should be smart enough to also do optimization in the second case..


	Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ