Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add rcutils_unsigned_char_array_t #125
add rcutils_unsigned_char_array_t #125
Changes from 3 commits
84e7201
9601be5
d3e6938
56e48d2
d40ed61
6a2844d
a3842e4
06702b0
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are you using
realloc
internally? And if so do you also use it when shrinking the data? And if so does that not also potentially mean the pointer address can change?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see now that you are, so this applies I believe:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, the pointer might change. Is there any way around that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In which case? In general, no I don't think so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We have it documented just before this sentence that all pointers to the underlying buffer will be invalidated. What do you advise to do here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It says that will only happen "if the new size is larger", which is not the only case and the reason I brought it up initially.
At least it should be stated that you should always assume the pointer is invalid after calling this, regardless of the input arguments and how they related to current values.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
RCUTILS_CHECK_ALLOCATOR(allocator, return RCUTILS_RET_INVALID_ARGUMENT);
Same for other occurrences below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
RCUTILS_CHECK_ARGUMENT_FOR_NULL(uint8_array, RCUTILS_RET_INVALID_ARGUMENT);
Same for other occurrences below.