Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Replace the RequireInsertCount decoding algorithm (#2379)

[Bence Béky <[e-mail]>]

I agree that an error should be generated in that case and I support adding the check to the code.  Since "the decoder reconstructs the Required Insert Count using the following algorithm", and not "this is an example algorithm to reconstruct the Required Insert Count", I consider the code to be normative, so I do not think it is necessary to spell this out in text.

BTW I'm not in love with this algorithm, mostly because it is longer and more complicated than the original without improving on clarity, but I can live with it.  I still think the one I proposed at #2248 would be the least error-prone (most implementers presumably don't care about how the algorithm works, they just copy it line by line, so the fewer lines, the better), but whatever is in the draft currently, or even the one proposed here, is just fine with me after all.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2379#issuecomment-458789140