From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-39800-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 28474 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2011 16:12:28 -0000
Received: (qmail 28462 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Sep 2011 16:12:27 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail-gx0-f169.google.com (HELO mail-gx0-f169.google.com) (209.85.161.169)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:12:07 +0000
Received: by gxk2 with SMTP id 2so569422gxk.0        for <gdb@sourceware.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.145.10 with SMTP id o10mr6072629yhj.90.1316535126430; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.236.203.135 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2011 09:12:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <09787EF419216C41A903FD14EE5506DD03094C6D5D@AUSX7MCPC103.AMER.DELL.COM>
References: <09787EF419216C41A903FD14EE5506DD03094C6D5D@AUSX7MCPC103.AMER.DELL.COM>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:12:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CACTLOFoWxg5JRkLN0406RL1n7Ku2F6GQxYV_R8McJ2_dQeMhOw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Python: should gdb.Value array indexing check bounds?
From: Matt Rice <ratmice@gmail.com>
To: Paul_Koning@dell.com
Cc: gdb@sourceware.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-09/txt/msg00070.txt.bz2

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:04 AM,  <Paul_Koning@dell.com> wrote:
> Currently, if a gdb.Value object corresponds to an array, array indexing =
is done C-style: no bounds checking, just pointer arithmetic.=A0 That's som=
ewhat unnatural to Python.=A0 Should it do a range check instead, and raise=
 IndexError for out of range index values?
>
> That wouldn't affect indexing of pointers, since those don't have a range=
 so the only possible approach is the C one.

I'd think no because of things like:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.1.2/gcc/Zero-Length.html
(which is possible with non-zero length arrays also).