Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Use INT64_MAX instead of UINT64_MAX for overflow checks #20

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2024
Merged

Use INT64_MAX instead of UINT64_MAX for overflow checks #20

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2024

Conversation

JBetz
Copy link
Contributor

@JBetz JBetz commented Apr 24, 2024

CAmount is int64_t to allow for negative, so we should be using its MAX instead of uint64_t.

@JBetz JBetz requested a review from Mixa84 as a code owner April 24, 2024 02:44
@Mixa84 Mixa84 merged commit d9c4e80 into dev Apr 24, 2024
1 check passed
@Mixa84 Mixa84 deleted the fix-overflow-checks branch April 24, 2024 09:38
JBetz added a commit that referenced this pull request May 3, 2024
@JBetz
Use INT64_MAX instead of UINT64_MAX for overflow checks (#20)
8fecffe
JBetz added a commit that referenced this pull request May 3, 2024
@JBetz
Use INT64_MAX instead of UINT64_MAX for overflow checks (#20)
0ac7d4b
Mixa84 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 6, 2024
@JBetz @Mixa84
Use INT64_MAX instead of UINT64_MAX for overflow checks (#20)
e943fff
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Mixa84 Mixa84 Mixa84 approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@JBetz @Mixa84