This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Do not pass NULL for the string in catch_errors
- From: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- To: Luis Machado <lgustavo at codesourcery dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:07:42 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not pass NULL for the string in catch_errors
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1441809933-9612-1-git-send-email-lgustavo at codesourcery dot com> <55F182B1 dot 4020404 at redhat dot com> <5627739A dot 2090401 at codesourcery dot com>
On 10/21/2015 12:14 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 10:16 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> On 09/09/2015 03:45 PM, Luis Machado wrote:
>>> I caught a segmentation fault while running gdb.reverse/sigall-reverse.exp,
>>> in a mingw32 GDB, in this code path. It boils down to the code trying to
>>> strlen () a NULL pointer. I tracked things down and it looks like
>>> record_full_message_wrapper_safe is the only occurrence.
>>>
>>> We could also change catch_errors to check the char pointer and pass the
>>> empty string automatically if the pointer is NULL. Then again, it seems like
>>> catch_errors is going away at any time now, being potentially replaced
>>> with catch_exceptions.
>>
>> It's been marked superseded for years. If you had fixed this by
>> converting this one instance, we'd be a little closer. ;-)
>>
>
> Well, we shouldn't rush! :-)
>
> Seriously, i've been looking into this and it doesn't look like
> catch_exceptions/catch_exceptions_with_msg is something we'll want to
> use in the long run either. Those couple functions also do not directly
> replace catch_errors.
>
> I thought about replacing the remaining catch_errors occurrences with
> TRY/CATCH/END_CATCH blocks, which sounds better aligned with what we
> want to do in the future - migrating to C++ etc. Then we can finally get
> rid of catch_errors and a few useless wrappers. How does that sound?
Sounds like better leave it be then. It may be that with proper C++/RAII
the try/catches would disappear altogether in the end, for instance.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves