[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#8215: possibly uninitialized variable lower_xoff in produce_glyphles
From: |
Lars Ingebrigtsen |
Subject: |
bug#8215: possibly uninitialized variable lower_xoff in produce_glyphless_glyph |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Jun 2021 10:06:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:
> In the meantime, I plan to work around the problem by initializing
> lower_xoff to 0, with a FIXME explaining the situation: this shouldn't
> introduce a bug, because at worst it will replace undefined behavior
> with defined behavior.
It looks like this code is still in place now, ten years later:
diff --git a/src/xdisp.c b/src/xdisp.c
index 44cb713011..44a317b578 100644
--- a/src/xdisp.c
+++ b/src/xdisp.c
@@ -22292,7 +22292,13 @@ produce_glyphless_glyph (struct it *it, int
for_no_font, Lisp_Object acronym)
if (metrics_upper.width >= metrics_lower.width)
lower_xoff = (width - metrics_lower.width) / 2;
else
- upper_xoff = (width - metrics_upper.width) / 2;
+ {
+ /* FIXME: This code doesn't look right. It formerly was
+ missing the "lower_xoff = 0;", which couldn't have
+ been right since it left lower_xoff uninitialized. */
+ lower_xoff = 0;
+ upper_xoff = (width - metrics_upper.width) / 2;
+ }
}
/* +5 is for horizontal bars of a box plus 1-pixel spaces at
Anybody have any insight into whether this is correct or not now?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no
- bug#8215: possibly uninitialized variable lower_xoff in produce_glyphless_glyph,
Lars Ingebrigtsen <=