It looks like this pull request may not have tests. Please make sure to add tests before merging. If you need an exemption to this rule, contact Hixie on the #hackers channel in Chat (don't just cc him here, he won't see it! He's on Discord!).

If you are not sure if you need tests, consider this rule of thumb: the purpose of a test is to make sure someone doesn't accidentally revert the fix. Ask yourself, is there anything in your PR that you feel it is important we not accidentally revert back to how it was before your fix?

Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing.

@cbracken not really a particular issue - same story as flutter/flutter#94608 (found through code audit vs. Win32 API docs).

Thanks. Normally we'd ask for a test, but I'm not sure we necessarily want to add a test that involves passing a string longer than std::string::max_size which, in a quick test on my machine, is 9 exabytes, or roughly 1 million American Libraries of Congress.

std::string::max_size is an instance method, and I suppose could return different values under different circumstances, or in some future libc++ update, or if we switch libc++ implementations, and this does update the check to be safe according to the std::string::resize documentation, so seems reasonable to land.

It will need a test exemption though.

test-exempt: not practically testable

@cbracken Great, camera_windows will be safe against 1+ million American Libraries of Congress string attacks :-).
Could you slap the automerge label as I don't have write access?

I see the submit-queue/CI failures in other plugin PRs so I'll sync from main to see if it unclogs things.

Thanks!