Andreas Rheinhardt (12019-12-26):
> I don't understand. Do you think that callers will take this as a blank
> cheque to not check at all?
No, I mean that using the wrong type will impose limitations on us
later, that will take work to resolve.
> My intention was actually to convert the types for
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 8:35 PM Nicolas George wrote:
> Andreas Rheinhardt (12019-12-26):
> > b) It guarantees to not allocated more than UINT_MAX - 1 elements, so
> > the caller needn't check for overflow if the desired size is increased
> > in steps of one.
>
> This is preparing trouble for lat
Andreas Rheinhardt (12019-12-26):
> b) It guarantees to not allocated more than UINT_MAX - 1 elements, so
> the caller needn't check for overflow if the desired size is increased
> in steps of one.
This is preparing trouble for later, and as Michael pointed, it will not
work when the number of ele
This is an array-equivalent of av_fast_realloc(). Its advantages
compared to using av_fast_realloc() for allocating arrays are as
follows:
a) It performs its own overflow checks for the multiplication that is
implicit in array allocations. (And it only needs to perform these
checks (as well as the
