This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Don't divide by zero when trying to destroy an uninitialised barrier.



On 26/04/2016 11:38, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 04/20/2016 09:46 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>> I do not see a compelling reason to not return EINVAL if the UB
>> could be detected and if POSIX stated this behaviour is recommended.
> 
> It would result in silent loss of synchronization if the return value is not checked.  Such bugs are difficult to track down.
> 
> Florian

But the check is user responsibility and getting such error means the
program is doing something fuzzy.

But thinking twice seems that abort in such cases seems a better
alternative, it gives the user a more straightforward indication
he should check his code. 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]