Message325284
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Jeffrey.Walton, alex, alexandre.vassalotti, deadshort, dmalcolm, donmez, fweimer, jcea, jwilk, loewis, mark.dickinson, martin.panter, matejcik, miss-islington, nnorwitz, pitrou, python-dev, serhiy.storchaka, sir-sigurd, vstinner, xiang.zhang, ztane |
| Date | 2018-09-13.18:54:21 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1536864861.6.0.956365154283.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Benjamin: what do you think of adding an explicit check after the "new_size <<= 1;" loop?
if (new_size > (size_t)PY_SSIZE_T_MAX) {
PyErr_NoMemory();
return -1;
}
Technically, PyMem_Malloc() already implements the check, so it's not really needed. So I'm not sure if it's needed :-) |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018-09-13 18:54:21 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, loewis, nnorwitz, jcea, mark.dickinson, pitrou, alexandre.vassalotti, donmez, matejcik, jwilk, alex, dmalcolm, python-dev, deadshort, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, ztane, fweimer, Jeffrey.Walton, xiang.zhang, sir-sigurd, miss-islington |
| 2018-09-13 18:54:21 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1536864861.6.0.956365154283.issue1621@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018-09-13 18:54:21 | vstinner | link | issue1621 messages |
| 2018-09-13 18:54:21 | vstinner | create | |