strcpy(keyname + strlen(KEYSTR), pProvName);
I changed that line to strcatW(keyname, pProvName). That makes a lot more sense Mike, thanks for the tip.
I'm wasn't exactly sure on this one so it would be great if you could help me on this one. When using pointer arithmetic, do the operations such as --, ++... increment or decrement by the size of the pointer type? For example,
*(ptr - sizeof(WCHAR)) = (dwType % 10) + '0'; *(ptr - sizeof(WCHAR) * 2) = ((dwType / 10) % 10) + '0'; *(ptr - sizeof(WCHAR) * 3) = (dwType / 100) + '0';
Is the sizeof(WCHAR) multiplication redundant because --ptr actually moves ptr down one WCHAR? I understand that if that's the case, but what about when the pointer is first initialized?
ptr = keyname + strlenW(keyname);
I guess it holds true here as well because keyname is a pointer and we're adding ot it. If that is the case, the included patch fixes the two things mentioned.
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 19:55:12 +0900, Mike McCormack mike@codeweavers.com wrote:
James Hawkins wrote:
PWSTR keyname;
keyname = CRYPT_Alloc(strlen(KEYSTR) + strlen(pProvName) +1);
keyname = CRYPT_Alloc((strlenW(KEYSTR) + strlenW(pProvName) + 1) * sizeof(WCHAR)); if (keyname) {
strcpy(keyname, KEYSTR);strcpy(keyname + strlen(KEYSTR), pProvName);
strcpyW(keyname, KEYSTR);strcpyW(keyname + strlenW(KEYSTR) * sizeof(WCHAR), pProvName); } else SetLastError(ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY); return keyname;}
This doesn't look right.... when using pointer arithmetic, you do so in increments of the pointer's type (eg. WCHAR). The following two lines are the same, and are both wrong:
strcpyW(keyname + strlenW(KEYSTR) * sizeof(WCHAR), pProvName); strcpyW(&keyname[strlenW(KEYSTR) * sizeof(WCHAR)], pProvName);
The right version would be:
strcpyW(&keyname[strlenW(KEYSTR)], pProvName);
but how about just using:
strcatW( keyname, pProvname );
Mike