masar...@aero.polimi.it writes: > In fact, it makes no sense that ber_ptr < ber_buf; if it happens, the > BerElement is corrupted, and an assertion failure may be more appropriate. > Right now, no test is done, and the (trivial) function could be replaced > with a macro... Since this is part of the private API, its change should > be harmless. Also, it should be renamed ber_int_ptrlen().
Leave this for RE25 or later. Many of the ber functions could use such a change. Changing just one which happens not to be exported makes little difference. See the comments I added in encode.c, for example. Also, remember that we often subtract pointers, so possibly we should make max(ber_slen_t) the supported maximum instead of max(ber_len_t). -- Hallvard
