On 08/11/2011 02:51 PM, Laine Stump wrote:
+ + /* Following attributes are optional but we had to make sure their NULL above */
s/their/they're/
Right, because VIR_REALLOC_N doesn't 0-fill the new memory (it doesn't know how many there were before).
But VIR_EXPAND_N and VIR_RESIZE_N _do_ know how to 0-fill memory; those are better macros to use when resizing an array where you want to keep initial contents, and avoid having to repeat 0-initialization yourselves (which macro depends on how large you ever expect the array to grow).
+ + if (def->srvrecords[i].domain) + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "domain='%s' ", def->srvrecords[i].domain); + if (def->srvrecords[i].target) + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "target='%s' ", def->srvrecords[i].target); + if (def->srvrecords[i].port) + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "port='%d' ", def->srvrecords[i].port); + if (def->srvrecords[i].priority) + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "priority='%d' ", def->srvrecords[i].priority); + if (def->srvrecords[i].weight) + virBufferAsprintf(buf, "weight='%d' ", def->srvrecords[i].weight);
Since 0 is a valid value for these according to the RFC, you should make their defaults -1 (see above where they're initialized), and check for -1 here.
and/or keep separate bool or bitfields tracking which fields were explicitly set (even if set to 0); the advantage of separate bools is that struct 0-initialization then gets your bool in the right state, instead of you having to manually set things to -1 for unset. -- Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-801-349-2682 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org