Add mkdirTemp to System module

[briandowns]

Signed-off-by: Brian Downs brian.downs@gmail.com

Well detailed description of the change :

Adds the ability to create temporary directories.

Resolves: #

Type of change:

• Bug fix

• New feature

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Housekeeping

• Tests have been updated to reflect the changes done within this PR (if applicable).

• Documentation has been updated to reflect the changes done within this PR (if applicable).

Preview (Screenshots) :

[Jason2605]

I think it's worth using the Result type here as mkdtemp can fail. In those situations it would be good to give some indication as to why it failed, we can do that by unwrapping a Result type

[Jason2605]

I try to avoid uses of malloc / alloc etc where possible and try to use the memory macros, this means if in the future we ever needed to change the memory allocator it's a simple switch.

We'll need to ensure we're freeing things up too since on success where creating a new string rather than inheriting the already alloc'd one.

[Jason2605]

We need to allocate for the terminating char too. My thinking here also is that if no template is passed the directory would be made via the 6 digits of XXXXXX template right? Doesn't that mean we only need to allocate for these 6 + \0?

Suggested change

	if (template[0] != '\0') {
	tmpl = ALLOCATE(vm, char, strlen(template));
	strcpy(tmpl, template);
	} else {
	tmpl = ALLOCATE(vm, char, PATH_MAX);
	strcpy(tmpl, "XXXXXX");
	}
	if (template[0] != '\0') {
	tmpl = ALLOCATE(vm, char, strlen(template) + 1);
	strcpy(tmpl, template);
	} else {
	tmpl = ALLOCATE(vm, char, 7);
	strcpy(tmpl, "XXXXXX");
	}

[Jason2605]

We could also probably keep reference to the length rather than calculating again via strlen in the takeString call

[Jason2605]

I see it's failing on the ubuntu machines, I'll need to give that a test and see whats going on but I don't have access to a machine until later on in the week now sorry!

[Jason2605]

Nevermind, found the issue! The test didn't setup the template to end with XXXXXX so it was retuning an error result, at this point the memory wasn't being free'd! I've also changed a couple things (rather than an empty string allow no template to be passed for ease) and added a few notes to the docs page. Think we should be all good on this PR now, thank you!

[briandowns]

Thanks. Been swamped this week. Was gonna get back to it this weekend.

[Jason2605]

No worries at all! I'd just noticed the issue after another quick scan of the PR and thought I'd get it in. Appreciate the PRs you've been opening!