Re: [PATCH 2/3] config: require at least one digit when parsing numbers

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
>
> If the input to strtoimax() or strtoumax() does not contain any digits
> then they return zero and set `end` to point to the start of the input
> string.  git_parse_[un]signed() do not check `end` and so fail to return
> an error and instead return a value of zero if the input string is a
> valid units factor without any digits (e.g "k").
>
> Signed-off-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
> ---
>  config.c | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/config.c b/config.c
> index d5069d4f01d..b7fb68026d8 100644
> --- a/config.c
> +++ b/config.c
> @@ -1167,6 +1167,10 @@ static int git_parse_signed(const char *value, intmax_t *ret, intmax_t max)
>  		val = strtoimax(value, &end, 0);
>  		if (errno == ERANGE)
>  			return 0;
> +		if (end == value) {
> +			errno = EINVAL;
> +			return 0;
> +		}

This means well, but doesn't strto*() family of functions silently
ignore leading blanks, e.g.

    l = strtol("  432k", &end, 0);
	... l == 432, *end = k ...

If you really want to reject a string with no number before the
optional unit, end at this point may not match value.  With " k" as
input, value would point at the space at the beginning, and end
would point at 'k'.

It does not look _too_ bad if we just let such an empty string
through and interpreted it as zero.  Is that a problem?  Who are we
trying to help?

>  		factor = get_unit_factor(end);
>  		if (!factor) {
>  			errno = EINVAL;
> @@ -1202,6 +1206,10 @@ static int git_parse_unsigned(const char *value, uintmax_t *ret, uintmax_t max)
>  		val = strtoumax(value, &end, 0);
>  		if (errno == ERANGE)
>  			return 0;
> +		if (end == value) {
> +			errno = EINVAL;
> +			return 0;
> +		}
>  		factor = get_unit_factor(end);
>  		if (!factor) {
>  			errno = EINVAL;