From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-34161-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 3567 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2015 17:04:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 34161
Received: (qmail 8938 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2015 17:04:18 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-CMAE-Score: 0
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=LrklEcZZ c=1 sm=1 tr=0	a=FT8er97JFeGWzr5TCOCO5w==:117
 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=q2GGsy2AAAAA:8	a=oR5dmqMzAAAA:8 a=-9mUelKeXuEA:10
 a=YNv0rlydsVwA:10	a=PNDVHYkgNpk1ufJBg9gA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-id: <150107090416.ZM26931@torch.brasslantern.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 09:04:16 -0800
In-reply-to:
 <CAHYJk3TTRTnXG5HWcFOyzxADA=hm=juTwkrCGiKGH-XMRZdEzg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In reply to Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
 "Re: PATCH (differently) Re: PATCH: Plug some fd leaks in bin_print" (Jan  7,
 9:26am)
References: <1420590318-17047-1-git-send-email-mikachu@gmail.com>
	<150106223532.ZM1050@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<150106230807.ZM13656@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<150106231454.ZM26126@torch.brasslantern.com>
	<CAHYJk3TTRTnXG5HWcFOyzxADA=hm=juTwkrCGiKGH-XMRZdEzg@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005)
To: zsh workers <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: PATCH (differently) Re: PATCH: Plug some fd leaks in bin_print
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Jan 7,  9:26am, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
} Subject: Re: PATCH (differently) Re: PATCH: Plug some fd leaks in bin_prin
}
} On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
} > On Jan 6, 11:08pm, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} > }
} > } Does coverity still find leaks after this?  What I've done is to move
} > } option validity checking earlier in the function so that fout should
} > } never get opened in the first place if we're not going to make proper
} > } use of it later.
} 
} Only Clint and Oliver have admin access, so I can't actually upload
} new code to coverity to check. Maybe if either of them see this they
} could add me/us as admins too?

I can push this to the master git a bit later today if nobody sees any
obvious problems with it.  "make check" does still pass.

You can see from that one hunk that the precedence of options is a bit
wacky.  -c / -C win if there is no format string but -z / -s win if
there is one.  I guess that sort of makes sense because columnation of
formatted output isn't supported.