On Saturday 10 February 2007 12:24, Roland Schwarz wrote:
Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
(Sorry for the flashy topic, but I reported the bug already ages ago and I'm slightly annoyed that it is still present. But hey, at least I could restrain myself from using multiple exclamation marks.)
If I remember well this topic already has been answered. What you are reporting is not a bug, but a cosmetic issue.
The code is simply broken, and dangerously so. I wouldn't call it cosmetic.
The code in question will never be called.
The broken function is declared in a public header, why shouldn't some user call it? Also, I know a way to make sure that it isn't called...
I intend to fix this in the next release, since some rewrite will be necessary to correctly return system messages. It is too short before release to introduce new behaviour.
Ah, wait: the patch (probably) applies to older versions, but it was taken against the CVS which reports version 1.35!
Please correct me if I am wrong in my assumption, that the reported behavior will not affect a user of the library.
Unnecessary bloat. Maybe, when someone calls the code, crashes. I'm a bit frustrated, please don't take it as a personal attack. Uli