From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 84E8929439 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43vd88A2AteO for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp62.i.mail.ru (smtp62.i.mail.ru [217.69.128.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTPS id 401AD21FFA for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2018 07:17:28 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:17:27 +0300 From: Alexander Turenko Subject: [tarantool-patches] Re: [PATCH 1/2] sql: LIKE & GLOB pattern comparison issue Message-ID: <20180817111727.y6nsbblpm5nh4n3g@tkn_work_nb> References: <43febf82af3702fadfea135db978ffb6426eb00d.1534436836.git.n.tatunov@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: tarantool-patches-bounce@freelists.org Reply-To: tarantool-patches@freelists.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: tarantool-patches List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: To: Alex Khatskevich Cc: "N.Tatunov" , tarantool-patches@freelists.org, "N.Tatunov" Hi! I have one note here. Please, cite only relavant parts of a message you reply, because some clients (say, mutt) don't wrap long cites automatically. WBR, Alexander Turenko. On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:23:16PM +0300, Alex Khatskevich wrote: > The code seems relatively normal, except for one thing below. > > > On 16.08.2018 20:00, N.Tatunov wrote: > > From: "N.Tatunov" > > > > +#define SQL_END_OF_STRING 0xffff > I have a look at icu code and It seems like 0xffff is an error, and it is > more similar to > invalid symbol that to "end of string". Check it, and fix the code, so that > it is treated as > an error. 0xffff is the result of 'end of a string' check as well as internal buffer overflow error. I have the relevant code pasted in the first review of the patch (July, 18). // source/common/ucnv.c::ucnv_getNextUChar 1860 s=*source; 1861 if(sourceLimit