From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9496: 24.0.50; Segfault on TAB-only composition Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:14:34 +0200 Message-ID: <83bopfdnh1.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8739g0tcp5.fsf@gnu.org> <4F2C355D.6020302@cs.ucla.edu> <83ipjnehnp.fsf@gnu.org> <4F2C5AB4.3080500@cs.ucla.edu> <83haz7dqz9.fsf@gnu.org> <4F2CDBDA.6080307@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328343332 10317 80.91.229.3 (4 Feb 2012 08:15:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 08:15:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9496@debbugs.gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 04 09:15:32 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamR-0006R0-Ha for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:15:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52224 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamR-0003gc-37 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45707) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamN-0003gG-Tc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamL-0007SC-AA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:27 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:49433) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamL-0007S3-8c for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rtamw-0007AR-08 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:16:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:16:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9496 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 9496-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9496.132834332227500 (code B ref 9496); Sat, 04 Feb 2012 08:16:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9496) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Feb 2012 08:15:22 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53056 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamI-00079V-Iz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:37083) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RtamE-00079F-ID for 9496@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 03:15:20 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LYV00F0005QD500@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 9496@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:14:34 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.149.90]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LYV00FNE0897960@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 10:14:34 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <4F2CDBDA.6080307@cs.ucla.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:56463 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2012 23:18:50 -0800 > From: Paul Eggert > > On 02/03/2012 10:58 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Then don't do that. > > I don't see why not. Because the result is meaningless anyway. Being able to "express" a 2G column wide "character" is not useful, so avoiding overflow for that use case is not really a solution to the problem. It would be a much better solution if char_width would limit the result to the same sane limit we have in all the related functions and macros, i.e. to 1000. If you limit everything in that function to 1000, including its result, there's no danger of overflow anywhere, and the resulting display is not too preposterous.