On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:28:17 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> said:
> On 01/05/13 15:42, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Wed, 01 May 2013 15:10:26 +0100 Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> > > said: > > > >> On 01/05/13 15:03, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > >>> 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... :) > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Haha, so you were hiding your bugs using my code. Making me an accessory > >> to segfault! > >> > >> OK though, I agree. > > > > buffer still was nul terminated... :) > > > > At index 14354545? :P :-P -- ------------- 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
