Comment # 8
on bug 9248
from Evan Huus
(In reply to comment #7)
> Good enough to backport and mark the issue closed? I know the unincremented
> offset stuff needs to be fixed, but the other part was just a "cleaner"
> version of your hack (in fact, I've cleaned it up some more (locally), but
> it doesn't change the functionality of "aborting" when there's no data left
> in the tvb)
Ideally I think we wouldn't have to check at all, and just trust that we
eventually run off the end of the TVB and throw an exception if the loop runs
too long. I don't know if your fixes to offset incrementation make that
possible or not.
I'm coming to the conclusion that 99% of the length_remaining checks are
unnecessary, probably the original author thought it was unsafe to run past the
end of the TVB.
Whether this stays open depends on how much time you want to spend on it, and
whether the original author can provide any more guidance. Your current patch
is good enough for the amount of time I have left this week :)
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.
