-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
url: fix array overrun in node:url::SetArgs() #47001
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Ideally this parameter should be an
const ada::url&
. It doesn't make sense to pass anada::result
in when we always expect it to be filled with the "valid" value.In fact the call sites should probably change from this:
to
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.
out.value()
returns a copy. The current implementation looks unsafe, butCHECK(out)
ensures that it is not. I tried to avoid returning a copy. @lemire wrote about this on Ada's discussion board: ada-url/ada#200There 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 think you misunderstood ada-url/ada#200.
out.value()
(and equivalently*out
) does not return a copy by itself. It returns a reference, so if you put it into aconst ada::url&
then no copies are made.On the other hand,
ada::url url = *out
, which would make a copy. That's not what I'm suggesting here.Alternatively, you can also do
ada::result out = ada::parse(input.ToStringView()); CHECK(out); ada::url url = std::move(*out);
which is written under the "performance tip". It would also avoid a copy.
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 is likely that the current code is safe and efficient. I think we are discussing 'coding style' which is subjective.
I don't personally find the
url->...
annoying.I am slightly triggered by the
(*argv)[..]
however. :-)What about using a reference to an array instead?
(The ampersand would be dropped from the calling site.)
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's a style guide thing: pointers for things that are mutated, const references otherwise.
With mutable references it's sometimes ambiguous to a reader if code operates on the original or on a copy. With pointers, no such ambiguity exists.