So what your saying is that because we create a memory layout for a
single u8 value
and then set it as the pointer for the Vec which we then trick into
thinking that it has a lot of memory causes UB?
This would mean that what I wrote into the issue is completely wrong? Is
that correct?
Thanks Josh for clarifying!
Hussein
On 2/3/23 01:44, Josh Stone wrote:
> On 2/2/23 1:26 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote:
>> I'm not familiar with this crate's code (it might be fine, for all I
>> know), but the tests themselves look like they're just begging for UB
>> and crashes :)
>> I think Josh is more familiar with this kind of stuff, but I think it
>> *should* be safe to just skip the test that crashes for Fedora builds
>> of rust-fallible_collections.
> Yeah, it's a bogus test input:
>
https://github.com/vcombey/fallible_collections/issues/35#issuecomment-14...
>
> Even on 64-bit, that would be UB to create the invalid Vec/slice, but it
> seems in practice that goes unnoticed and the impossible alloc fails as
> the test intends.
> _______________________________________________
> Rust mailing list -- rust(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to rust-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/rust@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue