From: Peter W. <pet...@we...> - 2008-10-07 14:12:53
|
Arnaud de Turckheim schrieb: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM, Arnaud de Turckheim <qu...@gm...>wrote: > > >> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:08 PM, Peter Wehrfritz <pet...@we...>wrote: >> >> >>> Enlightenment SVN schrieb: >>> >>>> + >>>> +# define INIT_SSL(svr) _ecore_con_init_ssl(svr) >>>> +# define SHUTDOWN_SSL(svr) _ecore_con_shutdown_ssl(svr) >>>> +# define FREE_SSL(svr) _ecore_con_free_ssl(svr) >>>> +# define UNSET_SSL(svr) \ >>>> + do { \ >>>> + svr->ssl = NULL; \ >>>> + svr->ssl_ctx = NULL; \ >>>> + } while (0); >>>> >>>> >>> The point of using do {} while(0) in macros, fades away if you append a >>> semicolon. >>> >> I'll remove the semicolon, sorry about that. >> No problem. >> >>>> +#else >>>> +# define INIT_SSL(svr) 0 >>>> +# define SHUTDOWN_SSL(svr) 0 >>>> +# define FREE_SSL(svr) 0 >>>> #endi >>>> >>> I haven't read the full code, but I think you are missing the >>> UNSET_SSL() for the !OPENSSL case. >>> >> We don't need UNSET_SSL() to be define when !USE_OPENSSL. >> INIT_SSL, SHUTDOWN_SSL and FREE_SSL have to be define to 0 because these >> macros are used in if tests. >> >> > Hmmm... Sorry we definitively need to define UNSET_SSL()... > Yeah, I wasn't sure either, else I probably fixed it myself. Peter |