[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes |
Date: |
Fri, 06 May 2011 22:57:30 +0300 |
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 14:13:06 -0300
>
> note that "the position of the nul byte" is the same as "the length
> of the list", so it's still <= MOST_POSITIVE_FIXNUM. It's only the
> position after the nul byte that would overflow.
But what about this code and its commentary (from
next_element_from_c_string):
/* IT's position can be greater IT->string_nchars in case a field
width or precision has been specified when the iterator was
initialized. */
if (IT_CHARPOS (*it) >= it->end_charpos)
{
/* End of the game. */
...
This happens when the iterator is initialized by reseat_to_string.
Admittedly, it's not very practical to have such huge strings that are
padded to an even larger width...
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Paul Eggert, 2011/05/04
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/05
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Paul Eggert, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/07