Re: BUG #5416: int4inc() is wrong - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From John Regehr
Subject Re: BUG #5416: int4inc() is wrong
Date
Msg-id 4BC66A57.2030809@cs.utah.edu
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #5416: int4inc() is wrong  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: BUG #5416: int4inc() is wrong
List pgsql-bugs
Hi Tom,

> If you can show me rewrites of all the basic arithmetic operations that
> detect overflow in full compliance with the C standard, and are
> readable, portable, and efficient, I'm all ears.

These are the best ones that I know of:


https://www.securecoding.cert.org/confluence/display/seccode/INT32-C.+Ensure+that+operations+on+signed+integers+do+not+result+in+overflow

Even if you dislike these, please take a look at the safety checks for
shifts.  The current postgresql shift functions need to be strengthened,
and it is easy to do.

John Regehr

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "Alex Soto Paez"
Date:
Subject: BUG #5423: problems installing postgresql-8.4 deleted folder / .s.PGSQL.lock not initiate the connecti
Next
From: Martin von Gagern
Date:
Subject: Re: build error: strlcat/strlcpy used from heimdal libroken.so