Am 25.10.22 um 12:00 schrieb Phillip Wood: > On 23/10/2022 06:57, René Scharfe wrote: >> >> That said, I'm not sure how useful the values INT_MIN, INT64_MIN >> and SSIZE_MIN (which unlike SSIZE_MAX is not defined by POSIX [*]) >> actually are. But doing the checks properly requires separate min >> and max values. > > I'm happy to go either way, while I agree passing separate limits to > allow INT_MIN is technically correct I'm not sure anyone has > complained that the current code is too restrictive. Right. Having separate patches for the different aspects (your fix, simplification due to adding a min parameter, range extension made possible by that) is probably best to discuss the merits of each. René
