[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This was likely a typo. In its current state, it's accessing uninitialized
memory. It looks like it's conceivable that an incorrect nextRowid could be
later used if the uninitialized value happens to be a small integer (smaller
than pC-nextRowid) and the valid flag
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This was likely a typo. In its current state, it's accessing uninitialized
memory. It looks like it's conceivable that an incorrect nextRowid could be
later used if the uninitialized value happens to be a small integer (smaller
than
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- vdbe.c~2005-12-19 12:42:25.0 -0500
+++ vdbe.c 2006-10-22 16:32:45.0 -0400
@@ -2937,7 +2937,7 @@
if( pOp-p2 OPFLAG_NCHANGE ) db-nChange++;
if( pOp-p2 OPFLAG_LASTROWID ) db-lastRowid = pNos-i;
if( pOp-p2
This was likely a typo. In its current state, it's accessing uninitialized
memory. It looks like it's conceivable that an incorrect nextRowid could be
later used if the uninitialized value happens to be a small integer (smaller
than pC-nextRowid) and the valid flag therefore doesn't get set to
