Re: libs/wine/debug: Avoid over-allocating memory in default_dbgstr_wn.

[Michael Karcher]

Am Dienstag, den 15.07.2008, 15:55 -0700 schrieb Dan Hipschman:
>  if (n < 0) n = 0;
>  size = 12 + min( 300, n * 5 );
> - dst = res = funcs.get_temp_buffer( n * 5 + 7 );
> - dst = res = funcs.get_temp_buffer( size );

This looks like fixing an under-allocation, not over-allocation. The
patched code allocates at least 5 bytes more, and never less than 312.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher

libs/wine/debug: Avoid over-allocating memory in default_dbgstr_wn.

[Tomas Carnecky]

Michael Karcher wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 15.07.2008, 15:55 -0700 schrieb Dan Hipschman:
> >  if (n < 0) n = 0;
> >  size = 12 + min( 300, n * 5 );
> > - dst = res = funcs.get_temp_buffer( n * 5 + 7 );
> > - dst = res = funcs.get_temp_buffer( size );
>
> This looks like fixing an under-allocation, not over-allocation. The
> patched code allocates at least 5 bytes more, and never less than 312.

Never _more_ than 312, because MIN(300, x) <= 300.

tom

libs/wine/debug: Avoid over-allocating memory in default_dbgstr_wn.

[Michael Karcher]

Am Mittwoch, den 16.07.2008, 16:10 +0200 schrieb Tomas Carnecky:
> > This looks like fixing an under-allocation, not over-allocation. The
> > patched code allocates at least 5 bytes more, and never less than 312.
>
> Never _more_ than 312, because MIN(300, x) <= 300.

Oops, got me. I like to read: min(300,x) as "300 is the minimum", which
is plain wrong in any programming language that has min. SmallerOf would
be more expressive, but min is perfectly OK. Perhaps I learn it some
day.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher