A Wednesday 28 May 2008 18:09:40, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 8:26 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > > What do you think? > > Looks good to me, except the "second" parameter in the test is no > longer necessary, and there is an off-by-three bug in the allocation > of new_image: > Outch! How careless am I ? :-) New patch attached. Can anyone approve (or reject) this? -- Pedro Alves