On 11/17/23 06:50, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> Thanks both. I have created the following PR to address this
> and another issue reported by Coverity:
> https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/13539
>
> I think it should work as expected now, but please verify.
It looks correct to me. Thanks for the rapid
translation(sr): Update Serbian messages translation (#13538)
Commit:
https://github.com/vim/vim/commit/cc6be3e7557cba790c78812d8789f30596e09ecc
Author: Ivan Pešić <27575106+eeva...@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Fri Nov 17 15:54:10 2023 +0400
translation(sr): Update Serbian messages tran
On Fr, 17 Nov 2023, Michael Henry wrote:
> Hi, Ernie,
>
> > I just tried the following as a single compare at entry
> > (derived from: x * 10 + digit <= max)
>
> if (x > ((INT_MAX - digit) / 10)) return FAIL;
>
> > AFAICT, it replicates your results without a separate check
> > for addit
Hi, Ernie,
> I just tried the following as a single compare at entry
> (derived from: x * 10 + digit <= max)
if (x > ((INT_MAX - digit) / 10)) return FAIL;
> AFAICT, it replicates your results without a separate check
> for addition.
Yes, I think `x > ((INT_MAX - digit) / 10)` is an accura
