On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:49:58PM +0000, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> From: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
> [...]
> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
Naturally. :)
> As promised, I am forwarding a 'saved' patch from Jeff, which was
> a by-product of a long-ago discussion regarding commit 5efde212fc
> ("zlib.c: use size_t for size", 2018-10-14).
>
> I have tested this patch on 'pu' (@6fd68134c8) and directly on top
> of commit 5efde212fc. (see branch 'mk/use-size-t-in-zlib').
>
> However, whilst I have been waiting for the tests to finish, I have
> been looking at the code and concluded that this does not _have_ to
> be applied on top of commit 5efde212fc. (I haven't done it, but just
> tweak the context line to read 'unsigned long *left)' rather than
> 'size_t *left)' and this should apply cleanly to 'master'. Also, it
> would have _exactly_ the same effect as the current code! ;-) ).
I think it does apply, though the reasoning in the commit message of
"this is OK because 'left' is large enough" becomes a lot more
hand-wavy. The patch is not making anything _worse_, certainly, but the
fact of the matter is that "left" still might not be big enough, if it
is not a size_t.
-Peff
