##Issues Concerning Allocation##
Issues Concerning Allocation
##Integer Overflow##
Integer Overflow
##Issues Concerning Allocation##
##Integer Overflow##
Issues Concerning Allocation
Integer Overflow
Note that it is possible that myNumber is equal to INT_MIN, and then the line myNumber *= -1; would lead to integer overflow (invoking undefined behavior for signed integer types). Consider using a fixed-width type, such as int32_t, that is passed into the function, and copy this to a larger fixed-width type (int64_t) type for a working copy within the function. The reasoning here is that the widths of the integer types are implementation-dependent, and even long int is only guaranteed to be at least as wide as int. By choosing specific widths for your integer types, you can protect against integer overflow in your calculations. The int64_t type is larger than int32_t, so the smallest value which can be held by an int32_t, when stored in an int64_t, can safely be multiplied by -1.
Note that it is possible that myNumber is equal to INT_MIN, and then the line myNumber *= -1; would lead to integer overflow (invoking undefined behavior for signed integer types). Consider using a fixed-width type, such as int32_t, that is passed into the function, and copy this to a larger fixed-width type (int64_t) type for a working copy within the function. The reasoning here is that the widths of the integer types are implementation-dependent, and even long int is only guaranteed to be at least as wide as int. By choosing specific widths for your integer types, you can protect against integer overflow in your calculations. The int64_t type is larger than int32_t, so the smallest value which can be held by an int32_t, when stored in an int64_t, can safely be multiplied by -1.
Note that it is possible that myNumber is equal to INT_MIN, and then the line myNumber *= -1; would lead to integer overflow (invoking undefined behavior for signed integer types). Consider using a fixed-width type, such as int32_t, that is passed into the function, and copy this to a larger fixed-width type (int64_t) for a working copy within the function. The reasoning here is that the widths of the integer types are implementation-dependent, and even long int is only guaranteed to be at least as wide as int. By choosing specific widths for your integer types, you can protect against integer overflow in your calculations. The int64_t type is larger than int32_t, so the smallest value which can be held by an int32_t, when stored in an int64_t, can safely be multiplied by -1.
I would also suggest moving the allocation from main() into the intToStr() function (which is already reallocating the memory), and returning a pointer to the allocated memory fromto the calling function. This would necessitate changing the function signature of intToStr() to:
I would also suggest moving the allocation from main() into the intToStr() function (which is already reallocating the memory), and returning a pointer to the allocated memory from the calling function. This would necessitate changing the function signature of intToStr() to:
I would also suggest moving the allocation from main() into the intToStr() function (which is already reallocating the memory), and returning a pointer to the allocated memory to the calling function. This would necessitate changing the function signature of intToStr() to: