On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 04:52:47PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2012 at 10:36:35AM +0200, Michal Židek wrote:
> On 09/26/2012 07:30 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >On Wed 26 Sep 2012 01:20:25 PM EDT, Michal Židek wrote:
> >>Another one liner. If no rules were passed to
> >>sdap_sudo_rules_refresh_send (if rules was NULL) and no error
> >>occurred, then variable ret was used uninitialized. This is not very
> >>likely to happen, but it is safer to have it initialized.
> >>Maybe we should consider adding initialization of all "ret"
> >>to our coding guidelines to avoid these "unlikely but possible"
> >>in new code.
> >Nack. We usually leave ret intentionally uninitialized because we always
> >want to set it explicitly under normal operation. This is because an
> >uninitialized use is detectable by the compiler or static analysis
> >tools. If we pre-initialized it, we could just end up with unexpected
> >behavior (falling into the default case).
> >Please make all assignments to 'ret' be intentional rather than
> Hmm.. I forgot to send new version of this patch. The ret variable
> is now set to EOK when program reaches the end without any error, so
> it is not used with garbage value in the clean-up.
Pushed to master.