[ft_putnbr_fd] Test feedback seems incorrect or is worded wrongly.

[DanielAJL]

For the tests I am having an issue with the "our putnbr_fd allocate memory, wtf ???" test result. I am not allocating any memory as far as I can tell. Once I change int to long int for the li_num variable; it fixes both failed cases. I'm not sure if the description of the test result is correct or that the test itself is not correct.

Test results:

My ft_putnbr_fd:

void	ft_putnbr_fd(int n, int fd)
{
	int	li_num;

	li_num = n;
	if (li_num < 0)
	{
		write(fd, "-", 1);
		li_num *= -1;
	}
	if (li_num >= 10)
	{
		ft_putnbr_fd((li_num / 10), fd);
		ft_putchar_fd(li_num % 10 + '0', fd);
	}
	else
		ft_putchar_fd(li_num + '0', fd);
}

[github-actions]

Hello! Thanks for contributing to the libft unit test.

Note that this repository is not maintained by the owner anymore, instead there is a bot that will automatically merge any reviewed pull requests.
If you feel like it, here are some links that can help you submiting a change in the code base::

• Create a pull request from a fork
• List of people that can review your pull request
• Automatically closing an issue with a pull request

[lorenzoedoardofrancesco]

You're overflowing your int when multiplying li_num *= -1 and li_num is MIN_INT (-2147483648)
It would give you +2147483648, which is MAX_INT + 1
That's the reason of the two errors (signed integer overflow is undefined behavior, which gives you error *2)