Re: proposed getitimer and setitimer functions

[Martin Grabmueller]

> From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
> Date: 06 Jul 2001 12:53:17 -0500
> 
> +SCM_DEFINE (scm_setitimer, "setitimer", 5, 0, 0,
[...]
> +  SCM_VALIDATE_INUM (1, which_timer);
> +  SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER (2, interval_seconds);
> +  SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER (3, interval_microseconds);
> +  SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER (4, value_seconds);
> +  SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER (5, value_microseconds);
> +
> +  c_which_timer = SCM_INUM(which_timer);
> +
> +  new_timer.it_interval.tv_sec = scm_num2long(interval_seconds, 0, NULL);
> +  new_timer.it_interval.tv_usec = scm_num2long(interval_microseconds, 0, 
> NULL);
> +  new_timer.it_value.tv_sec = scm_num2long(value_seconds, 0, NULL);
> +  new_timer.it_value.tv_usec = scm_num2long(value_microseconds, 0, NULL);

I have a comment about the code above.  You are passing NULL to
scm_num2long because you checked with SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER before.
This is not correct, because SCM_VALIDATE_NUMBER allows inexact
numbers and bignums.  scm_num2long will throw an out-of-range error
when given an inexact number or one that does not fit into a long
variable, thus passing NULL as the caller's name to scm_out_of_range.
I don't know what happens when NULL is given as a function name, but I
suppose it will be at least less informative than passing FUNC_NAME.

Regards,
  'martin