| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f |
| X-Recipient: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Recipient: | dj AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Original-DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; |
| s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: | |
| mime-version; bh=lhPGP+y/NrQ+O0wiP7G42UCChSZbi15kdjtfU+Q486U=; b=NVeBKzlG12DW | |
| 6lmYaZRQoM293P6cVixaT1ANl5nDyvx4COCCkySRQVurYfb3dnzAdvEtbkcnTOu/ULjQtybckYCzy | |
| STqjKk2xK2wzqpp9VM0l9qikFyI0iSDj5KcYcuwYUmO9R1Oetl9FTuUPNFfyaJhuuLePZrLpGbGOp | |
| a0c+GNqCz8RVfi+hZTnT80qaktDGbwIavzI0+paGo3x6z8MqCuQk8pEWacw5z4HiedJVT9QmK8Qem | |
| ptqhqQxhAMmsvqjLjgXQlVy8cyDp4wvh9dVs2fJCjLve/K+egq5ooSLbST/hHLJVSADsVxC7Qna9S | |
| PdT9WoXHuuvk/j8oy50Rhw==; | |
| Date: | Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:32:40 +0300 |
| Message-Id: | <86h6g6so3r.fsf@gnu.org> |
| From: | "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com> |
| To: | Pali <pali AT pali DOT im> |
| Cc: | cwsdpmi AT earthlink DOT net, dj AT delorie DOT com, sezeroz AT gmail DOT com, |
| djgpp AT delorie DOT com | |
| In-Reply-To: | <20240404184844.manihh7yyr7ed7hv@pali> (message from Pali on Thu, |
| 4 Apr 2024 20:48:44 +0200) | |
| Subject: | Re: Error handling of ECX in __dpmi_set_page_attributes() |
| References: | <20240320231522 DOT fowijjlk2h6ilw6x AT pali> |
| <86o7b82gnq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> | |
| <20240321175845 DOT shig623b45gtlfm5 AT pali> <20240404184844 DOT manihh7yyr7ed7hv AT pali> | |
| Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Mailing-List: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 20:48:44 +0200 > From: Pali <pali AT pali DOT im> > Cc: Charles Sandmann <cwsdpmi AT earthlink DOT net>, dj AT delorie DOT com, > sezeroz AT gmail DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com > > On Thursday 21 March 2024 09:22:17 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Should we at least check in the > > function's code that the value in ECX is non-negative and smaller than > > the value of ECX set by the caller? > > That is a good idea. Here is an alternative change which does this check: Thanks, installed.
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |