??? 09/23/05 21:06 Read: times |
#101472 - no flaw, but 1.000.000 gotchas Responding to: ???'s previous message |
is there a hidden flaw that could cause trouble?
no flaw, it can be done, but 1.000.000 gotchas. You will end up in a situation where, if something happens you will need 47 bottles of aspirin to debug it. be more then a short jump can handle, creating even messier code. not necessarily: jc ralph1 .... ralph1: ljmp ralph ; crutch is not THAT "ugly" Erik |
Topic | Author | Date |
RET to a different address | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
here is how pseudocode | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RET to a different address | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
no flaw, but 1.000.000 gotchas | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
That's what I wanted to know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Yes | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
"clever" | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
OT: my wife | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
no flaw, but seriously not recommended | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
experience | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
reload SP | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
restoring stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Recognisable string![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
named return value | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Bad Practice | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Well phrased | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
What I am doing with it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
try...catch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
setjmp / longjmp | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
when to try ... catch | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
the borderline | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Promises | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
who cares if an exceptiom is "acceptable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Parsing input data | 01/01/70 00:00 |