lib/libxml2
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2.git synced 2025-10-24 13:33:01 +03:00
Code Activity

Remove useless check in xmlParseAttributeListDecl

Browse Source 
Since we already successfully parsed the attribute name and other
items, it is guaranteed that we made progress in the input stream.

Comparing the input pointer to a previous value also looks fragile to
me. What if the input buffer was reallocated and the new "cur" pointer
happens to be the same as the old one? There are a couple of similar
checks which also take "consumed" into account. This seems to be safer
but I'm not convinced that it couldn't lead to false alarms in rare
situations.
This commit is contained in:
Nick Wellnhofer
2017-06-10 02:33:58 +02:00
parent f9e7997e80
commit 4ba8cc856b
1 changed files with 0 additions and 10 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
parser.c
View File

@@ -6107,7 +6107,6 @@ xmlParseAttributeListDecl(xmlParserCtxtPtr ctxt) {
SKIP_BLANKS; SKIP_BLANKS;
GROW; GROW;
while ((RAW != '>') && (ctxt->instate != XML_PARSER_EOF)) { while ((RAW != '>') && (ctxt->instate != XML_PARSER_EOF)) {
const xmlChar *check = CUR_PTR;
int type; int type;
int def; int def;
xmlChar *defaultValue = NULL; xmlChar *defaultValue = NULL;
@@ -6167,15 +6166,6 @@ xmlParseAttributeListDecl(xmlParserCtxtPtr ctxt) {
} }
SKIP_BLANKS; SKIP_BLANKS;
} }
if (check == CUR_PTR) {
xmlFatalErr(ctxt, XML_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
"in xmlParseAttributeListDecl\n");
if (defaultValue != NULL)
xmlFree(defaultValue);
if (tree != NULL)
xmlFreeEnumeration(tree);
break;
}
if ((ctxt->sax != NULL) && (!ctxt->disableSAX) && if ((ctxt->sax != NULL) && (!ctxt->disableSAX) &&
(ctxt->sax->attributeDecl != NULL)) (ctxt->sax->attributeDecl != NULL))
ctxt->sax->attributeDecl(ctxt->userData, elemName, attrName, ctxt->sax->attributeDecl(ctxt->userData, elemName, attrName,