Managing DNs in libads only in utf8
idra at samba.org
Tue Feb 27 14:35:27 GMT 2007
On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 15:35 +0100, Volker Lendecke wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:25:56AM -0500, simo wrote:
> > The difference is that if you do b_dn = a_dn at least you get something
> > consistent in this case. With char I guess you get simply a truncated
> > string. But it is a detail, and we should never assign it that way in
> > any case.
> True. Jeremy will definitely call for C++ here :-)
> From my point of view this is another argument against the
> typedef. A struct might help the programmer to think twice
> before assigning it.
Yes I see the value of not using the typedef.
> > If char is valid and is C99 can we use it? Or are we still trying not
> > to require C99 in samba3 ?
> As I said in the comment: This would be a trivial and
> isolated change which we can decide upon later. I'd rather
> not do it for the first run.
No problem, I'll use your patch for it just so that I can blame you if
something breaks :-D
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer
email: idra at samba.org
More information about the samba-technical