From: Ryan Flynn <parseerror@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:17:40 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix potential infinite loop given large unsigned integer
Message-ID: <a3f15ee60908100917k2a2d6de7ndd5e4ddd1d926cc3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0908101421340.8324@intel-tinevez-2-302>

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Johannes
Schindelin<Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 10 Aug 2009, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Christian
>> Couder<chriscool@tuxfamily.org> wrote:
>> >> log10() appears to be C99, but can be emulated on earlier C-versions by
>> >> doing #define log10(x) (log(x) / log(10.0))
>> >
>> > That would mean linking with -lm?
>>
>> I guess so. Are we currently trying to avoid linking to the math-parts
>> of libc?
>
> Yes.
>
> I guess we could fix the overflow thing very easily, though:
>
> static unsigned int digits_of_number(unsigned int number) {
>        unsigned int result;
>        for (result = 1; number; number /= 10, result++)
>                ; /* do nothing */
>        return result;
> }
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>
>

whoops, actually yours: digits_of_number(1) -> 2