Subject: Re: [bitcoindev] Re: Great Consensus Cleanup Revival

From: Eric Voskuil <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 18:31:07 -0700 (PDT)

Hello Antoine (other),

>  If you have code in pure C with variables on the stack no malloc, doing 
a check of the coinbase size after the socket read can be certainly more 
robust than checking a non-null pointer. 

Can you please clarify this for me? When you say "non-null pointer" do you 
mean C pointer or transaction input "null point" (sequence of 32 repeating 
0x00 bytes and 4 0xff)? What do you mean by "more robust"?

Thanks,
Eric

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email-masked].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/26b7321b-cc64-44b9-bc95-a4d8feb701e5n%40googlegroups.com.