> > I took a closer look at `builtin/patch-id.c` and it seems replacing > > `atoi()` (which is used to parse numbers in the hunk header) wouldn't > > improve anything, unless I'm missing something. > > > You can of course notice an invalid patch that places non-digit to > the hunk header and error out with such a change. If we are reading > output from Git that we are invoking, hopefully we will not see such > an invalid patch, but the command is designed to read arbitrary > input like a patch e-mail you received over the network, so I do not > think it is fair to say there is no merit to such a change, even > though I agree that it may not matter all that much. > > A corrupt patch may be getting a nonsense patch-ID with the current > code and hopefully is not matching other patches that are not > corrupt, but with such a change, a corrupt patch may not be getting > any patch-ID and a loop that computes patch-ID for many files and > try to match them up might need to be rewritten to take the new > failure case into account. Oh, I didn't know corrupt patches were a thing. I will start working on the patch for this.
