The entity is NULTERMINATED, octet string is not. So \0 is added, in
the last line,
and that's why the comparison is =. And of course, max-octets does not
include
terminating \0.
Aarno
Aarno
On 11.8.2004, at 01:17, Stipe Tolj wrote:
Stipe Tolj wrote:
Ok, now about the warning. I see this in
Aarno Syvänen wrote:
The entity is NULTERMINATED, octet string is not. So \0 is added, in
the last line,
and that's why the comparison is =. And of course, max-octets does not
include
terminating \0.
ok, but is the equal comparison realy required? wouldn't be enough?
Stipe
Alexander Malysh wrote:
NULTERMINATED as Aarno pointed already, is C string with terminating \0.
max-octets is _including_ terminating \0. comparison is no enough,
because if octstr len even equal to max-octets than that means we will drop
1 octet (because \0 will be added at the end), so the
] WARNING: SMPP: PDU element password
to long (length is 9, should be 9)
Pedro B. wrote:
Let alone the fact that too long is not spelled correctly. At least in
10 locations of the code. and i only checked 4 .c files.
as I said. Patches in 'diff -u' format always welcome ;) So if you
spott something, send in a patch and we'll apply it.
I'm sorry for what i'm about to
Stipe Tolj wrote:
Pedro B. wrote:
So this is a generic trade-off situation. Would you pick rather a good
software/system architect that is not perfect in english, or have a
person that does not any grammer typos, but fails to understand and
inherit crussial system design aspects?
That's why i
Stipe Tolj wrote:
Ok, now about the warning. I see this in gw/smsc/smpp_pdu.c:236:
...
#define NULTERMINATED(name, max_octets) \
if (p-name != NULL) { \
if (octstr_len(p-name) = max_octets) { \
warning(0, SMPP: PDU element %s to long \
