Re: Problems with newest smsd

[Jan Derfinak]

On Tue, 6 Aug 2002, Markus Plail wrote:

> Hi Jan!
> 
> * Jan Derfinak writes:
> > On Tue, 6 Aug 2002, Markus Plail wrote:
> >> Ok. I realized what the problem is. Actually there are two: 
> >> 1. phone driver shouldn't segfault but exit with appropriate error code
> >> 2. Jano changed my patch a bit, which lead to the segfault, but it
> >> would still not work without the error in the phone driver.
> >> 
> >> I realize that this change isn't obvious at all, and that actually
> >> there is no real reason for it, not to work Jano's way, but only
> >> mine. Still I think that, especially when one can't test the code, it
> >> should have been better to ask me why I did this. Especially as it was
> 
> > Ok. Please tell me why I must do the same initialization every iteration.
> 
> Because it works? As I have written it's not obvious.

But this is dirty. You made only workaround. You don't eliminate
problem. It is dirty when you unexpected modify variable which should
not be modified in logical sight. You must use other flag for it. And it is
very uneffective when I must in loop do the same initialization every
iteration. I want to draft that API functions must not change parts which
are not pertinent to action which they are doing. If not this will route
into untransparent API. If you look into definition of GetSMS you will see
that there is no word about clearing of SMSFolder or SMSFolderList. I think
moving constant initialization before loop is right thing and GetSMS is
writen unclear and should be fixed (don't be angry Pawel, I say only what
learnt during my work as programmer). If it is impossible, it must be noted
somewhere in visible place because it is very unexpected behaviour.


                                        jano


-- 
I like work, it fascinates me. I can sit and look at it for hours.
                        Jerome Klapka Jerome (Three men in a boat)