On 1/13/07, Nuno Lopes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:nlopess Sat Jan 13 11:16:15 2007 UTCModified files: (Branch: PHP_5_2) /php-src/ext/gd/libgd gd.c Log: fix valgrind error in test bug24594.phptwhile at it, remove some dead code and change the pts vector to char to save (much) memory# Pierre: one more to merge ;)Thanks for the catch. I like to merge (and keep the fix) if I know what you are fixing. Can you send me the details please?
As the commit log says, I fixed a few valgrind warnings in the bug24594.phpt test (it was reading one past the end of the array). The log is still available at http://gcov.php.net/viewer.php?version=PHP_5_2&func=valgrind&file=ext%2Fgd%2Ftests%2Fbug24594.phpt
the fix is this part:
- for (; x<=wx2 && (!pts[y][x] && gdImageGetPixel(im,x, y)==oc) ; x++) {
+ for (; x<wx2 && (!pts[y][x] && gdImageGetPixel(im,x, y)==oc) ; x++) {
About removing the dead code, again I do not like to do it during the RC phase. Please do it __after__ 5.2.1 (take #2) if there is a very good reason to do it, but I like to keep it (as I voluntary kept it).
It is really dead code and it was even marked as such. It is impossible (excluding compiler/cpu/memory/.. bugs) to reach the code I removed. If you feel scary with such trivial changes that means the extension hasn't enough tests :P (ok, kidding. that part of the code is covered)
OMG, this line was really bogus (and allocating huge amounts of memory unnecessarily)It was more wrong after your change (int -> char) but as I said I did not see good reasons to change that now. Or is it critical and if yes how?
it is critical to my point of view :) Before my patch it would take 4 times more memory than after the patch. With larger images, it is critical :P The code can still be further optimized when using square images, but I didn't deliberately make such change in an RC phase and without your approval.
Nuno
-- PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
