From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-74056-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 86730 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2016 13:20:01 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 86697 invoked by uid 89); 25 Oct 2016 13:20:01 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mx2.suse.de
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix undefined behaviour inconsistent for strtok
References: <1477393113-3845-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
	<mvmy41ck6lu.fsf@hawking.suse.de>
	<385e684a-8101-fd26-d2ff-464515a2e88c@linaro.org>
	<mvmoa28k2mn.fsf@hawking.suse.de>
	<1c969961-5ce7-8b73-bede-647263423d01@linaro.org>
X-Yow: Do you have exactly what I want in a plaid poindexter bar bat??
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 13:20:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <1c969961-5ce7-8b73-bede-647263423d01@linaro.org> (Adhemerval
	Zanella's message of "Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:13:05 -0200")
Message-ID: <mvmk2cwk1l7.fsf@hawking.suse.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00416.txt.bz2

On Okt 25 2016, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:

> On 25/10/2016 10:57, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> On Okt 25 2016, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 25/10/2016 09:31, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>>> On Okt 25 2016, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 	* string/strtok.c (strtok): Return null is previous input is also
>>>>
>>>> s/is/if/
>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/string/strtok.c b/string/strtok.c
>>>>> index 7a4574d..5c4b309 100644
>>>>> --- a/string/strtok.c
>>>>> +++ b/string/strtok.c
>>>>> @@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ STRTOK (char *s, const char *delim)
>>>>>  {
>>>>>    char *token;
>>>>>  
>>>>> -  if (s == NULL)
>>>>> -    s = olds;
>>>>> +  if ((s == NULL) && ((s = olds) == NULL))
>>>>
>>>> Please avoid assignment in an expression.  And the parens are redundant.
>>>>
>>>> Andreas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Right, with these fixes would it be acceptable?
>> 
>> I don't see much point in supporting invalid use of strtok.
>> 
>> Andreas.
>> 
>
> My point is just to add portability and align with other current
> implementations. 

Has it ever be a problem in the past?

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE  1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7
"And now for something completely different."