On 07/13/2012 04:53 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
Scott Wood wrote:
Timur, I know you said you don't control the format, but could you ask for a version number bump so that going forward there's a way to unambiguously mark the contents as "good" (the spec wouldn't change, but there would be no known implementations of v2 with this bug)?
I'm not sure what you mean. The specification for v1 has always said that the CRC is at address 0xFC. I just wrote the code wrong. I was always under the impression that I was writing the CRC at 0xFC, until York pointed that out to me last year. As far as the specification is concerned, nothing has changed.
I know the spec wouldn't change, except the version number. But as I said above, there would be no known v2 implementations with the bug. You would only check the bad CRC location if you see v1 data, because there are known buggy v1 implementations.
If not, and Wolfgang still refuses to accept this, what about checking the old location on a CRC fail, and if the old CRC passes, don't automatically use it but print a message telling the user that they probably need to run the migration command?
I honestly don't see what's wrong with checking the CRC in the old location, and using it if it's valid.
Neither do I; I was just suggesting a compromise should Wolfgang maintain his opposition.
-Scott