On 8/28/15, 10:34, "Salz, Rich" <[email protected]> wrote: >TL;DR -- Don't read the diff, look at the revised code. > >> The comment and code here are a slight mismatch, since qsize is >>dynamically >> computed (but limited to three values, the largest of which is used to >>size the >> local variable). It's not clear that using SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH for the >> check would actually be better, though. > >If you can think of a more-c lear comment, let me know. But checking >against qsize is the right thing to do. > >> >+ int seed_is_random = seed_in == NULL; >> >> This part seems really bogus; seed_is_random is an int, but seed_in is >>const >> unsigned char *; the assignment makes no sense. > >No, it's like "seed_in == NULL ? 1 : 0"
Sigh, need more coffee. Sorry for the noise :( -Ben > >> I guess the intent is to declare the variable in the outer loop? > >Nope. > >> and seed_in is never read after this point. > >It was set up before the loop. > >> The grammar here is slightly unusual; "for lengths of at least 2048 >>bits" >> or "for lengths 2048 bits and larger" would feel more natural to me. > >Open a ticket :) > > _______________________________________________ openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
