On Wed, 01 May 2013 15:00:57 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> said:
> On 01/05/13 14:47, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Wed, 01 May 2013 14:37:37 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> > > said: > > > >> On 01/05/13 14:17, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 14:03:42 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> > >>> said: > >>> > >>>> On 01/05/13 14:07, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:52:50 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> > >>>>> said: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 01/05/13 13:54, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 11:00:01 +0100 Tom Hacohen > >>>>>>> <tom.haco...@samsung.com> said: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 01/05/13 10:58, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 10:08:48 +0100 Tom Hacohen > >>>>>>>>> <tom.haco...@samsung.com> said: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 30/04/13 18:48, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:15:05 +0100 Tom Hacohen > >>>>>>>>>>> <tom.haco...@samsung.com> said: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Where did you get that on? > >>>>>>>>>>>> Anyhow, what do you think about changing it to unsigned wchar_t? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> on my pentium-m test machine... unicode val 0 was < 0 and thus > >>>>>>>>>>> walked below the array. yes. literally a negative. wouldnt that > >>>>>>>>>>> be wuchar_t or something? as wchar_t .. is a typedef... :) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hm... Annoying. There's no wuchar_t though. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> then we have... a problem... and it requires we check for < 0. :( > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I think me might be better off casting to unsigned. Damn you people > >>>>>>>> for not doing all the char type unsigned, wth?! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> chances are the compiler will produce the exact same code > >>>>>>> regardless... a cast or what is there now. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Nah, the whole point of the cast is to convert it to unsigned, I'm > >>>>>> quite certain the compiler is capable of doing that. > >>>>> > >>>>> but your casting inside the func to just avoid if (x < 0)... which a > >>>>> compiler will figure out to be the same as the cast to unsigned... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> The cast will work for unicode values that are greater than the signed > >>>> limit (less than 0), while the if just fail for them. > >>> > >>> there are no unicode values of that magnitude... unicode by definition > >>> doesnt even get close to using the most significant bit... :) it's by > >>> definition an invalid code if < 0 (for 32bit signed)... > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Oh, forgot to mention, I was thinking about boxes where wchar_t is > >> signed and 16bit. :) There we'll have trouble. > >> If you got negative values it must mean you've reached big enough > >> unicode values, so the issue I'm describing is indeed real. > > > > on boxes where its 16bit.. we will have problems... because unicode does not > > fit into 16bit.... we explicitly MUSt have it be a 32bit type in order to > > have enough space to store the hmmm... 22? bits needed for unicode? quick > > check... 10ffff is the top unicode value... that means 21bits... so > > unicode needs 21bits. if we have 16bit wchar_t's we are not able to do > > unicode. signed or not is irrelevant here. if its 32bit... we don't care :) > > > > Well, a subset of... :) > > But anyhow, how did you get your issue then? That it was negative? > That's what I'm interested in, as that means it's a path we actually get to. it looked like a garbage buffer... but evas shouldnt segv if there is an invalid unicode value there... :) -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introducing AppDynamics Lite, a free troubleshooting tool for Java/.NET Get 100% visibility into your production application - at no cost. Code-level diagnostics for performance bottlenecks with <2% overhead Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap1 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
