Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 22:12:22 +0100 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] open_memstream() and open_wmemstream() Message-ID: <20130207211222.GA98989@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <201302051546.43839.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201302051546.43839.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 03:46:43PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > I've written an implementation of open_memstream() and > open_wmemstream() along with a set of regression tests. I'm pretty > sure open_memstream() is correct, and I believe open_wmemstream() is > correct for expected usage. The latter might even do the right thing > if you split a multi-byte character across multiple writes. One > question I have is if my choice to discard any pending multi-byte > state in the stream anytime a seek changes the effective position in > the output stream. I think this is correct as stdio will flush any > pending data before doing a seek, so if there is a partially parsed > character we aren't going to get the rest of it. I don't think partially parsed characters can happen with a correct application. As per C99, an application must not call byte output functions on a wide-oriented stream, and vice versa. Discarding the shift state on fseek()/fseeko() is permitted (but should be documented as this is implementation-defined behaviour). State-dependent encodings (where this is relevant) are rarely used nowadays. The conversion to bytes and back probably makes open_wmemstream() quite slow but I don't think that is very important. > http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/open_memstream.patch The seek functions should check for overflow in the addition (for SEEK_CUR and SEEK_END) and the conversion to size_t. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130207211222.GA98989>