Re: [PATCH 3/6] tree-walk: use size_t consistently

On 7/31/2019 12:38 AM, Jeff King wrote: > We store and manipulate the cumulative traverse_info.pathlen as an > "int", which can overflow when we are fed ridiculously long pathnames > (e.g., ones at the edge of 2GB or 4GB, even if the individual tree entry > names are smaller than that). The results

[PATCH 3/6] tree-walk: use size_t consistently

We store and manipulate the cumulative traverse_info.pathlen as an "int", which can overflow when we are fed ridiculously long pathnames (e.g., ones at the edge of 2GB or 4GB, even if the individual tree entry names are smaller than that). The results can be confusing, though after some prodding I