|
|
 |
| found 31 articles for 0.303 sec |
  |
| On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 08:53:16PM +0200, Andreas Gunnarsson wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 07:04:25PM +0200, Andreas Gunnarsson wrote:
> > +static ssize_t
> > +evalfun(char *funname, ssize_t args)
> > +{
> > + ssize_t fun = function_node(funname, 0);
> > +
> > + if (fun == NOTFOUND)
> > + return node(cs("0"), END_NODE);
>
> That should be cs(" 0"), new diff below.
> However, there |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: dk.politik · Group Profile · Search for Rpar in dk.politik
Author: Bo Warming
Date: Aug 20, 2008 13:25
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 07:04:25PM +0200, Andreas Gunnarsson wrote: How-To-Repeat: bc -e 'while(1) a[1]=rt(2)' Oops, I meant to write "bc -e 'while(1) a[1]=2'" but this apparently brought another leak up to the surface. On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 03:55:01PM -0600, Otto Moerbeek wrote: This fixes all the leaks I found while testing variations of your test.
|
| Show full article (1.21Kb) · Show article thread |
Group: dk.politik · Group Profile · Search for Rpar in dk.politik
Author: Lyrik
Date: Aug 20, 2008 04:08
> How-To-Repeat: bc -e 'while(1) a[1]=rt(2)' Oops, I meant to write "bc -e 'while(1) a[1]=2'" but this apparently brought another leak up to the surface. On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 03:55:01PM -0600, Otto Moerbeek wrote: This fixes all the leaks I found while testing variations of your test. Your diff looks good to me. The commented line in stack_popstring() pops the value
|
| Show full article (0.92Kb) · Show article thread |
|
|
|
1 ·
2 ·
3 ·
4 ·
next |
|
|
