Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Syntactically correct, but with disastrous consequences

Rangsk · 03-14-2005, 08:34 PM

There's always the standard c/c++/java mistake:

Code:

void myfunc(char* p)
{
  if (p = NULL)
  {
    cout << "p is null" << endl;
  }

  // continue on assuming p isn't NULL
}

}

This is a guaranteed segmentation fault.

There was a movement a while back to write

Code:

if (NULL == p)

instead of

Code:

if (p == NULL)

since

Code:

if (NULL = p)

is NOT syntactically correct, but most (including me) just think it looks odd and hard to read.

Another common mistake:

Code:

if (...);
{
  // code
}

or

Code:

while(...);
{
  //code
}

This, of course, branches to or loops within a blank line instead of executing the code in the block.

Things like this can be disasterous.

03-14-2005, 08:34 PM	#11 (permalink)
Rangsk Crazy Location: San Diego, CA	There's always the standard c/c++/java mistake: Code: void myfunc(char* p) { if (p = NULL) { cout << "p is null" << endl; } // continue on assuming p isn't NULL } } This is a guaranteed segmentation fault. There was a movement a while back to write Code: if (NULL == p) instead of Code: if (p == NULL) since Code: if (NULL = p) is NOT syntactically correct, but most (including me) just think it looks odd and hard to read. Another common mistake: Code: if (...); { // code } or Code: while(...); { //code } This, of course, branches to or loops within a blank line instead of executing the code in the block. Things like this can be disasterous. __________________ "Don't believe everything you read on the internet. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose." -- Douglas Adams