Re: [Tinycc-devel] tcc_relocate() and tcc_relocate_ex()

[grischka]

Sean Conner wrote:
> > > > > Still no.  It returns (error ? -1 : ptr == NULL ? size : 0);
> > > > Isn't that what I said?  "returns the number of bytes iff [1] ptr is
> > > > NULL; othersise it returns 0 on success and -1 on an error."  Where
> > > > in there did I go wrong?
> > > I don't know.  Either you don't understand my C or you don't understand
> > > your English.
> > I see my mistake---I forgot a "not" between "ptr" and "
> No, I was right the first time.
>
> Aaaaaah!
>
> Okay, I give up!
>
> I can't understand your code.  I can't understand English.  I can't
> understand why you won't take a simple modification.  I'm done here.

Look, the return value depends on two variables (ptr, error) as in:

     ptr     | NULL | mem  | NULL | mem  |
     error   | no   | no   | yes  | yes  |
-------------+------+------+------+------+------------
     return  | size |  0   | -1   | -1   |

Your statement in English as I read it however suggests the
following behavior:

     ptr     | NULL | mem  | NULL | mem  |
     error   | no   | no   | yes  | yes  |
-------------+------+------+------+------+------------
     return  | size |  0   | size | -1   |

See the difference?  See the consequences (crashes) if libtcc users
follow your specification?

Despite of your problems to describe it, your usage is correct though:
https://github.com/spc476/lua-conmanorg/blob/master/src/tcc.c#L397

Anyway, like anyone working for free I rather push my own brilliant
ideas than anyone else's so now we have the one-function/triple-option
approach and I'm fine with it and you can live with it, at least.

http://repo.or.cz/w/tinycc.git/commitdiff/ca38792df17fc5c8d2bb6757c512101610420f1e

Thanks,

--- grischka