On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 04:22:10PM +0100, Anatoly Burakov wrote: > Remove custom number parser and use C standard library instead. In order to > keep compatibility with earlier versions of the parser, we have to take > into account a few quirks: > > - We do not consider "negative" numbers to be valid for anything other than > base-10 numbers, whereas C standard library does. We work around that by > forcing base-10 when parsing numbers we expect to be negative.
Is it likely to break much in the way of compatibility if we start allowing negative non-base-10 numbers? If it simplifies our code to allow it, I'd tend towards doing so unless there is a known case where it might cause problems. /Bruce > - We do not consider numbers such as "+4" to be valid, whereas C standard > library does. No one probably relies on this, so we just remove it from > our tests, as it is now a valid number. > - C standard library's strtoull does not do range checks on negative > numbers, so we have to parse knowingly-negative numbers as signed. We've > already changed this to be the case on account of point 1 from this list, > so no biggie. > - C standard library does not support binary numbers, so we keep around the > relevant parts of the custom parser in place to support binary numbers. > > Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com> > --- <snip>
