Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.5dev.14h.patch.gz

[Thomas Dickey]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 04:33:02PM +0400, Leonid Pauzner wrote:
> 8-Apr-2003 08:13 Thomas Dickey wrote:
> 
> >> Reading your patch (especially in LYMainLoop.c area),
> >> I am courious about the possibility of
> >>        (doc->post_data != NULL) *but* (isBEmpty(doc->post_data) == TRUE)
> >>
> >> currently in lynx.
> >> IMHO, the invariant "post_data is NULL, or not NULL with len >0"
> >> could easily be achieved somethere in HText_SibmitForm - the only place
> >> where post_data is really changed.
> 
> > yes - that's a possible problem with the change
> > (a form that has no data to post).
> 
> Is there a case? (empty post data really sent with POST method)???

I don't know (it doesn't seem reasonable - which is why I said "possible").

> > I guess we need a flag such as "have_post_data" to cover this situation.
> 
> Better, use `post_data' as a pointer to some struct (more members).

it _is_ a pointer.  The isBEmpty() macro is hiding that.

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden