On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 04:13:19PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> The first is general.  Mutt uses fixed size buffers for a lot of things,
> but I think this might be one of the cases where we don't want to use a
> LONG_STRING fixed length buffer.  I realize this makes the
> implementation even more complex, so I don't insist on it, but just
> wanted to mention it.  (I would much rather have your patch and put that
> on the TODO list to fix than wait for your free time situation to
> improve!)

Actually, after looking at the later patches using mutt_apply_replace(),
this isn't as big a deal as I thought.  They are using it for a
display-only copy of the value, not changing the original value.

If we were to add an option in the future to have ~s search disp_subj,
then this could be an issue.  But for now, again, I'd rather just have
the buffer overruns fixed and submit as-is.

-- 
Kevin J. McCarthy
GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C  5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to