Conversation
| "std::ptr::read", | ||
| ]; | ||
| for frame in ecx.stack().iter() | ||
| .rev().take(3) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
lol, the last 3 stackframes!?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah well, I had to pick some number. I didn't want to manually whitelist all callees, but also didn't want to walk up the entire stack.
It's a hack to even have a whitelist, so... whatever?^^
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | |||
| fn main() { | |||
| assert!(std::char::from_u32(-1_i32 as u32).is_none()); | |||
| let _ = match unsafe { std::mem::transmute::<i32, char>(-1) } { //~ ERROR encountered 4294967295, but expected something in the range 0..=1114111 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
char has a range? what's going on here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes it does? It must be a valid unicode codepoint.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought char's value ranges had gaps and were generally totally insane. 1114111 seems a little low, too
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It has gaps. Remember we do first layout-based validation and then type-based validation. This value is so out of range it is already caught by the first.
But if that's too low, our layout code would be wrong and that would be BAD (TM).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The maximal value currently seems to be 0x10ffff. In decimal that's 1114111.
Maybe we should make validation print the range in hexadecimal...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nah seems fine. Or we could print both. It's not really clear what is more readable...
|
|
||
| let g: fn(*const i32) = unsafe { std::mem::transmute(f as fn(&i32)) }; | ||
|
|
||
| g(0usize as *const i32) //~ ERROR encountered 0, but expected something greater or equal to 1 |
|
(Btw, this is a PR against the rustup branch, to become part of the other PR, because it all waits for rust-lang/rust#54955 to land.) |
2 participants
By whitelisting one method that currently fails to validate (
std::ptr::read), we can enable validation for plenty more things. Seems like a good deal!Also, enable validation in compile-fail and finally unignore some of the tests there :)