[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes |
Date: |
Sat, 07 May 2011 10:55:52 +0300 |
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Sat, 07 May 2011 00:18:47 -0300
>
> >> note that "the position of the nul byte" is the same as "the length
> >> of the list", so it's still <= MOST_POSITIVE_FIXNUM. It's only the
> >> position after the nul byte that would overflow.
>
> > But what about this code and its commentary (from
> > next_element_from_c_string):
>
> > /* IT's position can be greater IT->string_nchars in case a field
> > width or precision has been specified when the iterator was
> > initialized. */
> > if (IT_CHARPOS (*it) >= it->end_charpos)
> > {
> > /* End of the game. */
> > ...
>
> Do these ever make it into a Lisp_Object?
Well, the resulting string can be returned by format-mode-line, for
example.
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Paul Eggert, 2011/05/04
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/05
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Paul Eggert, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/06
- Re: issues with recent doprnt-related changes,
Eli Zaretskii <=