[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Aug 2021 11:17:59 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 |
On 8/30/21 7:12 AM, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Thanks for the pointer -- it doesn't say anything about why ssize_t
can't be used though? As a signed variant of size_t, it seems relevant
to consider.
Good question. Addressed in the attached patch, which I pushed.
The objective is to eliminate bugs due to the use of unsigned types
for numerical values.
Is that a realistic goal with C using the unsigned type size_t for
low-level functions like strlen()? It seems like an un-idiomatic goal.
It is realistic, at least within the Gnulib context. It's also realistic
in the context of Glibc, which has recently started to prohibit heap
allocations larger than PTRDIFF_MAX for the usual security/correctness
reasons.
The attached patch also attempts to address this question.
My idea was that both APIs would be supported indefinitely.
Bruno already addressed this point, and I tend to agree with him for
this particular API.
0001-idx-add-commentary.patch
Description: Text Data
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, (continued)
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Bruno Haible, 2021/08/28
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Paul Eggert, 2021/08/29
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Bruno Haible, 2021/08/29
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Paul Eggert, 2021/08/29
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Bruno Haible, 2021/08/29
- Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Paul Eggert, 2021/08/29
Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Paul Eggert, 2021/08/29
Re: [PATCH] base32, base64: prefer signed to unsigned integers, Simon Josefsson, 2021/08/29