The use of Span is problematic, because it lacks methods such as rbegin, leading to compile failures when used:
0error: no member named 'rbegin' in 'Span<const unsigned char>'
One could fix Span, but it seems better to use std::span, given that Span will be removed anyway in the long term.
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.
See the guideline for information on the review process.
| Type | Reviewers |
|---|---|
| ACK | dergoegge |
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
Span to std::span, why is ok to do this here but not everywhere?
I’m out of the loop on converting
Spantostd::span, why is ok to do this here but not everywhere?
Good question!
It is quite some work to do it everywhere (I am working on it), because Span and std::span differ in their interface. (One is lacking methods of the other, and vice-versa).
However, as long as the replacement compiles, it should be safe.
Moreover, FuzzBufferType is a distinct type, mainly used to denote the type of a byte-view, which will be passed to FuzzedDataProvider, so the switch can be done independently here, without affecting non-fuzz code.
I think this is ok to do, but you’ll need adjust the bitset code instroduced in #30160:
0test/fuzz/bitset.cpp:284:23: error: no matching function for call to 'ReadByte'
1 unsigned typdat = ReadByte(buffer) % 8;
2 ^~~~~~~~
3test/fuzz/bitset.cpp:16:9: note: candidate function not viable: no known conversion from 'FuzzBufferType' (aka 'span<const unsigned char>') to 'Span<const uint8_t> &' (aka 'Span<const unsigned char> &') for 1st argument
4uint8_t ReadByte(Span<const uint8_t>& buffer)
5 ^
61 error generated.