AuroraMiddleware/scuffed-code
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

ICU-21024 RBBI Table Builder / Coverity CID 1460598 "Dodgy Code" issue

Browse Source 
Fix the issue identified by Coverity.
The problem was in code handling the mapping from the table build time
representation of a set of status values for an RBBI rule to the corresponding
status data as saved in a binary RBBI rule file.

The problem was benign, the rbbi data built by the incorrect code would
would still operate correctly, although it might not byte-for-byte match
that built by ICU4C. (The problem was in Java only.)
This commit is contained in:
Andy Heninger 2020-03-20 14:19:44 -07:00
parent f6622ab2f1
commit d7e40df284
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

12
icu4j/main/classes/core/src/com/ibm/icu/text/RBBITableBuilder.java
View File

@ -814,12 +814,12 @@ class RBBITableBuilder {
fRB.fRuleStatusVals.add(Integer.valueOf(1)); // Num of statuses in group
fRB.fRuleStatusVals.add(Integer.valueOf(0)); // and our single status of zero
SortedSet<Integer> s0 = new TreeSet<>();
Integer izero = Integer.valueOf(0);
fRB.fStatusSets.put(s0, izero);
SortedSet<Integer> s1 = new TreeSet<>();
s1.add(izero);
fRB.fStatusSets.put(s0, izero);
SortedSet<Integer> s0 = new TreeSet<>(); // mapping for rules with no explicit tagging
fRB.fStatusSets.put(s0, Integer.valueOf(0)); // (key is an empty set).
SortedSet<Integer> s1 = new TreeSet<>(); // mapping for rules with explicit tagging of {0}
s1.add(Integer.valueOf(0));
fRB.fStatusSets.put(s1, Integer.valueOf(0));
}
// For each state, check whether the state's status tag values are