Re: [AD] bugfix in floodfill()

[Sven Sandberg <svens@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric Botcazou wrote:
> > But it does make sense for lpos, rpos and y, in case someone floodfills
> > really big bitmaps (but note that in general, we assume bitmaps can be
> > addressed with fixed point coordinates, i.e., <32768). In floodfill it 
> > can't hurt supporting up to 65535-sized bitmaps, so I attach an updated
> > patch.
>
> Yes, but coordinates are signed for Allegro and this would not really buy us 
> anything so I think we should keep signed shorts.

It buys us that floodfill works with bitmaps with 32768<=width<65536 or 
32768<=height<65536. Probably most other functions work with such 
bitmaps. And it doesn't un-buy us anything, anyway.

> > Sorry, what should be ASSERTed and where is the critical point?
>
> The index wrapping around and the place in the code where this may happen.

Oh, but now that we have int's, this can't happen: the int is an array 
index, and the language guarantees that no array is so big that an int 
can't index it.

--
Sven