GNU bug report logs - #75648
Minor safety improvements to fns.c/eval.c

Previous Next

Full log

Message #29 received at 75648 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: 75648 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75648: Minor safety improvements to fns.c/eval.c
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:43:01 +0200

> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 16:44:12 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
> Cc: 75648 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > This is fine by me, but I wonder whether we should replace the NILP
> > tests with !CONSP, when we are about to take XCAR or XCDR?
> 
> (Response to the plist bug fix only, thus I reduced the CC list).
> 
> We should!  I missed that one.  Is it okay if I just use CONSP and
> reverse the arguments? "CONSP (x) ? XCDR (x) : y" makes it a little more
> obvious that the code is safe than "!CONSP (x) ? y : XCDR (x)", IMHO.

Sure, that's okay.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.