[#7708] Bug in libsnmp-ruby1.8 — Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@...>

Hi,

8 messages 2006/04/11
[#7709] Re: Bug in libsnmp-ruby1.8 — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2006/04/11

On Apr 11, 2006, at 6:23 AM, Hadmut Danisch wrote:

[#7770] Re: possible defect in array.c — "Brown, Warren" <warrenbrown@...>

> rb_range_beg_len (in range.c) does set beg and len.

13 messages 2006/04/26
[#7771] Re: possible defect in array.c — "Pat Eyler" <rubypate@...> 2006/04/26

On 4/26/06, Brown, Warren <warrenbrown@aquire.com> wrote:

Re: possible defect in array.c

From: "Brown, Warren" <warrenbrown@...>
Date: 2006-04-26 14:40:15 UTC
List: ruby-core #7770
> rb_range_beg_len (in range.c) does set beg and len.
> I'm hoping the other edge cases (argc <1 or >3) are
> covered too.

    Instead of marking this as a false positive due to assumptions about
what is happening outside of this function, why not just initialize
"beg" to 0 and not make *any* assumptions?  Seems like a much better
solution to me.

    - Warren Brown



In This Thread

Prev Next