On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 03:17:59 -0400, Bill Clark <wclarkxoom(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Maybe the type of approach in (1) isn't as bad as
I thought though,
since we could just keep a running total of how much data has been
included, and block further inclusions once a limit has been reached.
MAX_CUMULATIVE_INCLUDE_SIZE?
Wait... that's exactly what you said in the post you linked, isn't it? :)
I mis-read it the first time, and thought you meant a 2MB limit on
each included file.
I think the MAX_INCLUDE_DEPTH solution might preferable to checking
for loops directly though, since that could end up getting very
complicated if the cycle is particularly long (or else end up being
too restrictive, depending on how it was implemented).
-Bill Clark