Re: [gtk-list] Re: Apprarently simple signal/event question
- From: "M. David Krauss" <Fader frodo com>
- To: gtk-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: [gtk-list] Re: Apprarently simple signal/event question
- Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 02:14:07 -0500
On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
+ 1) is this really dangerous?
+
+ It depends on the call, and on what you consider dangerous.
+ Disregarding a return value will not, in and of itself, cause you any
+ trouble. Ever. I don't know why a function like memcpy bothers to
+ return a pointer, since there is no new information in it and there's
+ no reason to look at it.
For the record, memcpy returns a pointer basically as a convenience of
notation. It is often nice to pass the return of memcpy straight on to
something else in the same line. For instance:
char *a, *b;
...
memcpy (b, a, sizeof char);
dosomethingelse (b);
// as opposed to...
dosomethingelse( memcpy(b, a, sizeof char));
(Man! C++ has made my C skills rot... That seems soo complicated... :)
Cheers,
-M. D. Krauss
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]