|
From: | Richard Hansen |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] bindat strz fixes |
Date: | Wed, 1 Jun 2022 01:28:06 -0400 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 |
Thank you for the review! I have attached a new set of patches. On 5/31/22 19:00, Stefan Monnier wrote:
+(let ((spec (bindat-type :pack-var v + (x strz 2 :pack-val v) + :unpack-val x)))Any particular reason why you define it this way instead of just (bindat-type strz 2) ?
Thanks, I should have realized that was possible. Fixed.
+ (ert-deftest bindat-test--strz-fixedlen-pack-overflow () + :expected-result :failed + (should (equal (bindat-pack spec "abc") "\141\0")))I think this changes the intended semantics. Until now `strz N` has meant that N bytes are used to encode the string and that it can hold upto a string of length N (in which case there's no terminating NUL byte). I agree that it's not the only valid semantics, but I'm not sure we want to change it at this point. Do you have a particular reason to make this change.
A few: * The documentation says that the packed output is null terminated so that's what users expect. * It is safer (packed output is less likely to cause some other program to run past the end of the field). * Without this change, there is no difference between `strz N` and `str N`. So what would be the point of `strz N`? * If the user selected strz, the application probably requires null termination in all cases, not just when the string is under a certain length.
+ (ert-deftest bindat-test--strz-fixedlen-unpack () + (should (equal (bindat-unpack spec "\0\0") "")) + (should (equal (bindat-unpack spec "a\0") "a"))))How 'bout (bindat-unpack spec "ab") ?
I added some comments explaining why cases like that aren't tested.
(tho I'd write "abc\0" i.s.o "\141\142\143\0").
Done.
Not sure what we should do about (bindat-unpack spec "abc")?
That is not a valid packed string, so I'm not too concerned about it. Currently it signals an args-out-of-range error because it tries to read past the end of the string, which seems like an acceptable behavior to me. We could make the error message more friendly, such as "end of input reached while searching for null terminator", but I'd rather not make that change right now with this set of patches.
- `(cl-incf bindat-idx ,(cond - ((null len) `(length ,val)) - ((numberp len) len) - (t `(or ,len (length ,val)))))) + `(cl-incf bindat-idx ,(if (numberp len) + len + `(1+ (length ,val)))))`len` is supposed to be an ELisp *expression*.
Ah, I was wondering why it was written that way. Fixed.
0001-bindat-tests-strz-Add-more-tests.patch
Description: Text Data
0002-bindat-strz-Fix-off-by-one-bug-in-computed-length.patch
Description: Text Data
0003-bindat-strz-Consistent-length-type-check.patch
Description: Text Data
0004-bindat-strz-Always-write-null-terminator.patch
Description: Text Data
0005-bindat-strz-Fix-wrong-type-argument-error-when-unpac.patch
Description: Text Data
0006-bindat-strz-Move-all-pack-logic-to-pack-function.patch
Description: Text Data
0007-bindat-strz-Fix-packing-of-long-strings-with-legacy-.patch
Description: Text Data
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |