Re: [PATCH] blame: prevent a segv when -L given start > EOF

Jay Soffian [off-list ref] writes:

-	if (lno < top)
+	if (lno < top || lno < bottom)
 		die("file %s has only %lu lines", path, lno);

Thanks; I think we make sure that "bottom < top" always hold true before
we reach this point, so checking with bottom alone should suffice, no?

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Jay Soffian [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

-     if (lno < top)
+     if (lno < top || lno < bottom)
              die("file %s has only %lu lines", path, lno);

Thanks; I think we make sure that "bottom < top" always hold true before
we reach this point,

We swap them if they're reversed.

so checking with bottom alone should suffice, no?

Ah true. You can squash that in? :-)

j.

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Jay Soffian [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

so checking with bottom alone should suffice, no?

Ah true. You can squash that in? :-)

Actually, no, that doesn't work, but my head can't keep bottom=start,
top=end straight so I'm not even sure why not.

j.

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Jay Soffian [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

-     if (lno < top)
+     if (lno < top || lno < bottom)
              die("file %s has only %lu lines", path, lno);

Thanks; I think we make sure that "bottom < top" always hold true before
we reach this point, so checking with bottom alone should suffice, no?

Right, so given "-L 10" at the point of that check:

bottom = 0
top = 10

Whereas given "-L 10,100" at the point of that check:

bottom = 9
top = 100

So the code needs to check both.  Previously it made sure neither was
< 1, and swapped bottom/top if they were reversed.

Sorry for the confusion.

j.