Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] alloca.3: clarify reasoning for no error return in BUGS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 09:42:26PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> On 9/14/21 2:41 PM, наб wrote:
> > diff --git a/man3/alloca.3 b/man3/alloca.3
> > index 71348e609..20761b079 100644
> > --- a/man3/alloca.3
> > +++ b/man3/alloca.3
> > -There is no error indication if the stack frame cannot be extended.
> > -(However, after a failed allocation, the program is likely to receive a
> > +Due to the nature of the stack, it is impossible to check if the allocation
> > +would overflow the space available, and, hence, neither is indicating an error.
> I'm not sure this use of neither (without a preceding "not") is valid
> English.  Is it?
I don't see why not: "impossible" provides the first negation
(the "not" is lives in the "in-" prefix
 (well, "im-" because it's before a bilabial plosive),
 and "neither" is in its "likewise not" adverbial use).

наб

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Documentation]     [Netdev]     [Linux Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux