(Un)packing code makes assumptions about struct sizes
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 4.3k
- Forks
- 300
- Avg merge
- 2d 13h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 61
Description
(Un)packing code feels unsafe, as there are some assumptions of types that can change. We should at least have some const asserts here for size assumptions (by looking using https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.u32.html#method.leading_zeros on max of types).
_Originally posted by @sagudev in https://github.com/linebender/vello/pull/1173#discussion_r2397119809_
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the Rust packing and unpacking code referenced by the issue, then review its assumptions about integer type sizes and the relevant Rust `u32::leading_zeros` documentation. Add compile-time size assertions for the assumptions identified there and verify that the code still builds and its existing checks pass.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- computer-graphics
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100