On 15/10/18 01:01, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 04:03:48PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>
>>> So I kind of wonder if a comment would be better than xsize_t here.
>>> Something like:
>>>
>>> if (avail > len) {
>>> /*
>>> * This can never truncate because we know that len is smaller
>>> * than avail, which is already a size_t.
>>> */
>>> avail = (size_t)len;
>>> }
>>
>> Heh, you are, of course, correct! (that will learn me[1]). :-D
>>
>> Hmm, let's see if I can muster the enthusiasm to do all that
>> testing again!
>
> For the record, I am not opposed to including the comment _and_ using
> xsize_t() to do the cast, giving us an assertion that the comment is
> correct.
Heh, I haven't found any enthusiasm tonight. Let's see if there
are any more comments/opinions.
Thanks.
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
