On 04/23/2014 11:57 AM, Wireshark code review wrote:
URL:
https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=commit;h=fe195c0c978b4b92dc5a77daa6449a7f1314243d
Submitter: Evan Huus (eapa...@gmail.com)
Changed: branch: master
Repository: wireshark
Commits:
fe195c0 by Evan Huus (eapa...@gmail.com):
Don't throw for offset at end of TVB with len -1.
g867a1827e7dc88896ee27a107eb35c4b3973d270 introduced a change to
cleanup/fix
handling of bounds checks for -1 length fields, but it ended up
guaranteeing a
throw for 0-length tvbs, which isn't good; we ought to be able to add
0-length
FT_PROTOCOL items at the very least.
Well nuts...
Better names for the function than _cheat are welcome, but I want to shut
up the
buildbot.
What I'm thinking at the moment is your new function should become
tvb_captured_length_remaining() (so: throwing an exception returns the
old -1 return value). I fail to see any real benefit in not throwing an
exception if someone's offset is beyond the end of a TVB (of course I
also haven't dug through the uses of the function yet).
tvb_ensure_captured_length_remaining() then remains to ensure there's at
least one byte there (though I admit I do have some doubts about whether
that's really necessary; if a caller wants to ensure there's one byte
there then they could/should just call tvb_captured_length_remaining()
with an offset of offset+1).
Thoughts?
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
