Comment 103 for bug 518422

Was the backout (of this patch) mentioned in comment 51 because the the "xpcshell-tests on Mac" problem which *seems* from the comments here to have been because of a different patch. Ie did this really break something despite what comments 48, 50 seem to imply?

The patch here doesn't seem to check if the Clone() succeeds so I suppose it might cause a problem on some systems assuming that Clone() needs to allocate memory.

Mind you I assume that Normalize() also might need to allocate memory if the resulting string is longer, I don't know if it can/will fail gracefully.

Apart from those the only thing which looks likely (IMHO) is just that it changes the memory layout slightly so maybe exposing a corruption problem somewhere else...

Does anyone have a simple test case showing a failure after applying the patch?

I wonder if changing the patch to call both current->Normalize() and normalized->Normalize() will show the same problem (not that such a patch would fix the problem that this bug was opened for, but it might be a test to see what is actually failing).